askchapo

22836 readers

189 users here now

Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.

Rules:

Posts must ask a question.
If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.
Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.
Try !feedback@hexbear.net if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

PorkrollPosadist@hexbear.net

replaceable@hexbear.net

VILenin@hexbear.net

EmmaGoldman@hexbear.net

SexUnderSocialism@hexbear.net

ZoomeristLeninist@hexbear.net

khizuo@hexbear.net

Sulvor@hexbear.net

A question about "People profess to believe something that they do not sincerely believe to show support for their in-group or hostility to an out-group." (hexbear.net)

submitted 1 month ago by InevitableSwing@hexbear.net to c/askchapo@hexbear.net

6 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Is there a more common term for that? I think it's a huge problem in polling. I googled and I didn't make much progress. I found this...

Expressive Responding in Support of Donald Trump: An Extended Replication of Schaffner and Luks (2018) | Collabra: Psychology | University of California Press

There is considerable debate about whether survey respondents regularly engage in "expressive responding" – professing to believe something that they do not sincerely believe to show support for their in-group or hostility to an out-group.

The problem is that "expressive responding" is a technical term. At Wikipedia I searched for "expressive responding" (in double quotes) and I got zero results.

Of course that mental mindset is big deal when it comes to Trump. A recent example - Lots of Republicans suddenly think the economy wasn't that bad after all. There's not exactly a "debate" when it comes to Trump and republican voters. They always do it when Trump is involved. It's not a coincidence that the election always causes a rapid change in what they say they believe.

top 6 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Frank@hexbear.net 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Shibboleth would be one applicable term

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shibboleth

I've been thinking and discussing this a lot and mostly using "in-group signalling", which is clunky but I think that's mostly what it's called in Anthropology.

I guess with GOP specifically we use "Owning the libs" as a catch all for when fash take a position they don't necessarily believe in because they think it will aggravate Democrats.

[–] InevitableSwing@hexbear.net 6 points 1 month ago

"in-group signalling"

I'll go with that. It seems really good and it's far better than any polling term like "expressive responding" because that stuff reeks of polling guru dork jargon speak. It's crazy to me how American politics tends to be devoid of basic concepts like in-group signalling, margin of error, etc. Polling is considered some kind of augury producing magic numbers that can divine the future.

I wonder how much time I'd have to spend at the 538 website to find their explanation of in-group signalling and I wonder what ridiculous term they use instead.

[–] miz@hexbear.net 5 points 1 month ago

I don't know if there's a term but it reminds me of that experiment where there's one test subject and a whole bunch of actors who gaslight the subject by all agreeing on an obviously wrong answer

[–] TheBroodian@hexbear.net 5 points 1 month ago

I think you're describing virtue signaling. The name might be misleading, but I think your description is essentially the intended purpose of such an invention

[–] Zuzak@hexbear.net 3 points 1 month ago

"Symbolic belief."

[–] miz@hexbear.net 3 points 1 month ago

I would check through False Witnesses to see if they use any good terms for it