Search results

Filters

  • Journals
  • Keywords
  • Date

Search results

Number of results: 6
items per page: 25 50 75
Sort by:
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Sukcesy gospodarki rynkowej przyczyniły się do ukształtowania rynkowej ideologii, według której zasady rynkowe są najlepszym sposobem regulowania tak gospodarki, jak innych dziedzin, takich jak edukacja, nauka, służba zdrowia itp. Ideologia ta opiera się na psychologicznym założeniu, że źródłem sukcesu wolnego rynku jest jego zdolność do mobilizowania ludzkiej motywacji i twórczych sił człowieka. Źródłem tej mobilizacji jest osobisty interes pobudzany przez rywalizację o kontrolę nad zasobami. Artykuł pokazuje, że aktywność kierowana wyłącznie przez własny interes może deformować działalność rynkową. Psychologowie dowodzą, że ludzie są zdolni do generowania motywów nastawionych na dobro własne, lecz również na dobro innych osób i na dobro społeczne w różnych jego formach. Te dwa rodzaje motywacji nieraz ze sobą konkurują, ale też mogą współdziałać. Uaktywnienie danej motywacji zależy od społecznych definicji znaczenia sytuacji, z którymi człowiek ma do czynienia. Ideologia rynkowa, stanowiąc jedno ze źródeł takich definicji, sprzyja dominacji własnego interesu jako podstawy rynkowej działalności.
Go to article

Bibliography

1. Balcerowicz, Leszek. 2012. Odkrywając wolność. Przeciw zniewoleniu umysłów. W: L. Balcerowicz, red. Odkrywając wolność. Przeciw zniewoleniu umysłów. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Zysk, 9–61.
2. Bateson, Daniel C. 2009. These things called empathy: eight related but distinct phenomena. In: J. Decety, W. Ickes, eds. The Social Neuroscience of Empathy. Cambridge: MIT Press, 3–15.
3. Baumeister, Roy F. 1987. How the self-became a problem: A psychological review of historical research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1: 163–176.
4. Baumeister, Roy. 1999 The nature and structure of the Self: An Overview. In: R. F. Baumeister, eds. The Self in Social Psychology. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press, 1–20.
5. Baumeister, Roy F., Mark R. Leary. 1995. The Need to Belong. Desire for Interperso nal attachments as fundamental human motivation. In: E. T. Higgins, A. W. Kruglanski, eds. Motivational science: Social and personality perspective. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press, 24–49.
6. Berkowitz, Leonard, Louise R. Daniels. 1964. Affecting the salience of the social responsibility norm: Effects of past help on the response to dependency relationships. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 68, 3: 275–281.
7. Blau, Peter M. 2006. Wymiana społeczna. W: A. Jasińska-Kania, L.M. Nijakowski, J. Szacki, M. Ziółkowski, red. Współczesne teorie socjologiczne. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar, 82–92.
8. Chugh, Dolly, Max H. Bazerman, Mahzarin R. Banaji. 2005. Bounded ethicality as a psychological barrier to recognizing conflicts of interest. In: D.A. Moore., D. M. Cain., G. Loewenstein, M. H. Bazerman, eds. Conflict of interest: Challenges and solutions in business, law, medicine, and public policy. New York: Cambridge University Press, 74–95.
9. Crocker, Jennifer, Lora E. Park. 2003. Seeking self-esteem: Construction, maintenance, and protection of self-worth. In: M.R. Leary, J.P Tangney, eds. Handbook of self and identity. New York: Guilford Press, 291–313.
10. Derlega, Valerian, Janusz Grzelak, eds. 1982. Cooperation and helping behavior. New York: Academic Press.
11. Eisenberg, Nancy, Natalie D. Eggum, Laura Di Giunta. 2010. Empathy-related responding: Associations with Prosocial Behavior, Aggression, and Intergroup Relations. Soc Issues Policy Rev. 1, 4(1): 143–180. DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-2409.2010.01020.x.
12. Goffman, Erving. 2006. Pierwotne ramy interpretacji. W: A. Jasińska-Kania, L.M. Nijakowski, J. Szacki, M. Ziółkowski, red. Współczesne teorie socjologiczne. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar, 336–348.
13. Golec de Zavala, Agnieszka. 2011. Collective Narcissism and Intergroup Hostility: The Dark Side of In-Group Love, 309–320. DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2011.00351.x.
14. Gollwitzer, Peter M., Robert A. Wicklund. 1985. The Pursuit of Self-Defining Goals. In: J. Kuhl, J. Beckmann, eds. Action control. From cognition to behawior. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 61–85.
15. Greenwald, Anthony. 1980. The totalitarian ego: Fabrication and revision of personal history. American Psychologist, 35: 603–618.
16. Grzelak, Janusz. 2001. Ja, my, oni. Interes własny a procesy poznawcze i zachowanie ludzi w sytuacji konfliktu. W: M. Kofta, T. Szustrowa, red. Złudzenia, które pozwalają żyć. Warszawa: WN PWN.
17. Higgins, Edward T. 1999. Self-Discrepancy: A Theory relating self and affect. In: R. Baumeister, eds. The Self in social psychology. Philadelphia: Taylor & Francis, 150–175.
18. Hoffman, Martin. 2000. Empathy and moral development: Implications for caring and justice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
19. Homans, George C. 2006. Podstawowe procesy społeczne. W: A. Jasińska-Kania, L.M. Nijakowski, J. Szacki, M. Ziółkowski, red. Współczesne teorie socjologiczne. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar, 72–61.
20. Jarymowicz, Maria. 2001. Czy jesteśmy egoistami? W: M. Kofta, T. Szustrowa, red. Złudzenia, które pozwalają żyć. Warszawa: WN PWN.
21. Jarymowicz, Maria, Anna Szuster. 2021. Uprzedzenia, wrogość czy harmonia społeczna? Sopot: Smak Słowa.
22. Kolhatkar, Sheelah. 2018. The doomsday investor. The New Yorker, August 27: 44–55.
23. Kruglanski, Arie. 1996. Motivated social cognition. Principles of the interface. In: E.T Higgins, A.W. Kruglanski, eds. Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles. The Guilford Press, 493–520.
24. Kruglanski, Arie, J.Y Shah, Ayelet Fishbach, Ron Friedman, Woo Young Chun, David Sleeth-Keppler. 2002. A theory of goal systems. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 34: 331–378.
25. McClintock, Charles G., Eddy Van Avermeat. 1982. Social value and rules of fairness: A theoretical perspective. In: V.J. Derlega, J. Grzelak, eds. Cooperation and helping behavior. New York: Academic Press, 44–73.
26. McFarland, Sam, Justin Hacket, Katarzyna Hamer, Iva Katzarska-Miller, Anna Malsch, Gerhard Reese, Stephen Reysen. 2019. Global Human Identification and Citizenship: A Review of Psychological Studies. doi 10.1111/pops.12572,
27. McFarland, Sam, Matthew Webb, Derek Brown. 2012. All Humanity Is My Ingroup: A Measure and Studies of Identification With All Humanity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 5: 830–853.
28. Miller, Dale T. 1999. The norm of self-interest. American Psychologist, 54, 12: 1053–1060. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.54.12.1053.
29. Miller, Dale T., Rebecca K. Ratner. 1998. The disparity between the actual and assumed power of self-interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74: 53–63.
30. Moscovici, Serge. 2001. Why a theory of social representation? In: K. Deaux, G. Philogene, eds. Representation of the social. Oxford UK: Blackwell.
31. Oliner, Samuel, Pearl Oliner. 1988. Altruistic personality. New York: J. Wiley.
32. Piliavin, Jane A., John F. Dovidio, Samuel L. Gaertner, Russell D. Clark. 1981. Emergency intervention. New York: Academic Press.
33. Pruitt, Dean, G. Jeffrey, Z. Rubin. 1986. Social conflict. New York: Random House.
34. Radkiewicz, Piotr, Krystyna Skarżyńska. 2021. Competetive Jungle Belief Who are the ‘social Darwinists’? On dispositional determinants of perceiving the social world as competitive jungle. PLoS ONE, August 11, DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0254434.
35. Rand, Ayn. 1962. Introducing Objectivism by Ayn Rand. https://courses.aynrand.org/works/introducing-objectivism.
36. Reich, Robert. 2018. The common good. New York: Knopf.
37. Reicher, Steve D. 1996. The Battle of Westminster’ Developing the Social Identity Model. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 1: 115–134.
38. Reykowski, Janusz. 1986. Motywacja, postawy prospołeczne a osobowość. Warszawa: PWN.
39. Reykowski, Janusz. 2002. O motywacyjnych regulatorach altruistycznego pomagania. Na przykładzie osób, które ratowały Żydów w okresie hitlerowskiej okupacji. W: I. Kurcz, D. Kądzielawa, red. Psychologia czynności. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar, 65–84.
40. Reykowski, Janusz. 2019. Rozczarowanie demokracją. Perspektywa psychologiczna. Sopot: Smak słowa.
41. Ross, Lee, Richard E. Nisbett. 1991. The person and the situation. NY: McGraw Hill.
42. Sandel, Michael J. 2012. What isn’t for sale? The Atlantic, 4: 62–66.
43. Siem, Birte. 2022. The relationship between empathic concern and perceived personal costs for helping and how it is affected by similarity perceptions. The Journal of Social Psychology, 162, 1: 178–197.
44. Skarżyńska, Krystyna. 1985. Psychospołeczne aspekty decyzji alokacyjnych. Wrocław: Zakład im. Ossolińskich.
45. Skarżyńska, Krystyna. 2020. My. Portret psychologiczno-społeczny Polaków z polityką w tle. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
46. Snyder, Mark, Steven W. Gangestad. 2000. Self-monitoring: Appraisal and reappraisal. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 4: 530–555.
47. Stiglitz, Joseph. E. 2010. Free fall. New York: Norton.
48. Szuster, Anna. 2005. W poszukiwaniu źródeł i uwarunkowań ludzkiego altruizmu. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Instytutu Psychologii PAN.
49. Tajfel, Henri, Michael C. Billig, Robert P. Bundy, Claude Flament. 1971. Social categorization and intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 1: 149–178.
50. Tesser, Abraham. 2003. Self-evaluation. In: M.R. Leary, J.P Tangney, eds. Handbook of self and identity. New York: Guilford Press, 275–290.
51. Tetlock, Philip E. 1986. A value pluralism model of ideological reasoning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 4: 819–827.
52. Tetlock, Philip E. 2003.Thinking the unthinkable: sacred values and taboo cognitions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 7: 320–324.
53. Tetlock, Philip E., O. V. Kristel, S. B. Elson, M. C. Green, J. S. Lerner. 2000. The psychology of the unthinkable: Taboo trade-offs, forbidden base rates, and heretical counterfactuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 5: 853– 870. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.78.5.853.
54. Wagner, Ulrich, Robert A. Wicklund, Sigrid Shaigan. 1990. Open Devaluation and Rejection of a Fellow Student: The Impact of Threat To a Self-Definition. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 77, 1: 61–76.
55. Wicklund, Robert A., Peter M. Gollwitzer.1982. Symbolic self – completion. Hillsdale, NJ.: Erlebaum.
56. Wojciszke, Bogdan, Aleksandra Cisłak. 2006. Self interest in social and political perception. In: A. Golec de Zavala, K. Skarżyńska, eds. Understanding social change. Political psychology in Poland. New York: Nova Science.
57. Ziółkowski, Marek. 2015. Teoria socjologiczna a transformacja społeczeństwa polskiego. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.


Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Janusz Reykowski
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Instytut Psychologii PAN, Warszawa
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

One of the most common and dangerous conflicts in contemporary democracies is related to cultural differences in understanding of the basic principles of social organization. Such conflict is developing also in Poland. Its most recent manifestation is the serious confrontation between the new appointed Minister of Education and Science of the Polish government and the large part of the Polish scientific community. In the first part of the paper, I analyze on the basis of his publication the minister’s socio-political worldview. I am implying that it may explain his conflict arousing policy. I am focusing on his concept of the natural law and his use of this concept, on his understandings of democracy and secular state, and on his interpretation of minority rights in democracy. I am concluding that he represents the ultraconservative (right-wing) version of the Roman Catholic worldview and is trying to impose its implications on the Polish education as well as scientific institutions. In the second part of the paper, I am analyzing sociopsychological preconditions of cultural conflicts and factors that may determine the radicalization of these conflicts.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Janusz Reykowski
ORCID: ORCID
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Populism is understood here according to the widely accepted definition by C. Mudde as a para-ideology containing two components, anti-elitism and the sovereignty of the people. It expresses itself in the form of social movements, specific forms of policy pursued, which sustains or inspires social conflicts, and at the same time is intended to please the people. Politics is led by a charismatic leader who gains legitimacy through elections, but the conditions of electoral competition are modified in various ways to ensure the success of the populist party and its leader. The article discusses the results of psychological research that deal with the psychological determinants of populist attitudes. They concern the emotionalmotivational and cognitive functioning of those who accept the para-ideology of populism and populist power. The genesis of populism is also discussed, which is related to some important defects in liberal democracies.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Janusz Reykowski
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Instytut Psychologii PAN, Warszawa
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The Theory of Bounded Ethicality postulates that in situations involving consequences for self and/or others people make ethical decisions that bring self- -oriented motivational forces to bear on decision-making. These ethical decisions are biased by a stubborn view of oneself, as moral, competent, and deserving and thus, not susceptible to conflicts of interest. People unconsciously favor this particular vision of the self being unaware of data that may contradict it. This conception of ethical decision making seems to imply that self-oriented motivation plays a dominant role in regulation of human behavior. But there are good theoretical reasons for questioning this view. In the paper, I describe three different research programs that may illustrate operation of the three different motivational systems – only one of them seems to corresponds with the Bounded Ethicality model. It means that that “bounded ethicality“ may appear in pure form in specific situations – when self system is activated by specific egxogenous and endogenous factors while other systems are not remain in the latent state.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Janusz Reykowski
1 2
ORCID: ORCID

  1. członek korespondent PAN
  2. Instytut Psychologii PAN, Warszawa

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more