Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T16:04:58.452Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

22 - International and Individual Differences in Support for Human Rights

from Part II - The Politics of Intergroup Attitudes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2022

By
Sam McFarland
Edited by
Danny Osborne  and
Chris G. Sibley
Danny Osborne
Affiliation:
University of Auckland
Chris G. Sibley
Affiliation:
University of Auckland
Get access

Summary

Nations and individuals vary in their support for human rights. International surveys face difficult issues (e.g., acquiring comparable samples, insuring equivalent meaning of survey questions in many languages), and these surveys are limited in the range of human rights issues examined and number of countries surveyed. Internationally, support for different kinds of human rights (civil and economic rights) correlate positively, although the rights that receive stronger support are shaped by a nation’s religion and culture. Individuals’ support for human rights is strongly positively associated with 'identification with all humanity', other universal values (e.g., 'protecting the global environment'), and the moral foundations of care and fairness, and strongly negatively related to ethnocentrism, authoritarianism, the social dominance orientation, and right-wing political ideology, A number of other constructs are also weakly associated with human rights support either positively (e.g., dispositional empathy) or negatively (e.g. need for structure).

Keywords

Human rightsIdentification with all humanityEthnocentrismMoral foundationsPolitical ideology
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Political Psychology , pp. 346 - 360
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. Harper.Google Scholar
Allport, G. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Doubleday.Google Scholar
Altemeyer, B. (1981). Right-wing authoritarianism. University of Manitoba Press.Google Scholar
Altemeyer, B. (1998). The other ‘authoritarian personality’. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 47–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60382-2Google Scholar
Amnesty International. (2014). Attitudes to torture. http://www.amnestyusa.org/pdfs/GlobalSurveyAttitudesToTorture2014.pdfGoogle Scholar
Avery, P. G. (1988). Political tolerance among adolescents. Theory and Research in Social Education, 16(3), 183–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.1988.10505564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrows, T. S. (1981). College students’ knowledge and beliefs: A survey of global understanding. Change Magazine Press.Google Scholar
BBC World Service Poll. (2006, 19 October). World citizens reject torture, global poll reveals. http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2006/10_october/19/poll.shtmlGoogle Scholar
Behling, O., & Law, K. S. (2000). Translating questionnaires and other research instruments: Problems and solutions. Sage Publications. https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412986373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bizumic, B. (2019). Ethnocentrism: Integrated perspectives. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315642970Google Scholar
Candee, D. (1976). Structure and choice in moral reasoning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34(6), 1293–1301. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.34.6.1293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carbello, M. (2015). The globalization of public opinion. In Stoychev, K. (Ed.), Voice of the people 2015 (pp. 16–28). Gallup International. https://www.gallup-international.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/GIA-Book-2015.pdfGoogle Scholar
Cherney, I. D., Greteman, A. J., & Travers, B. G. (2008). A cross-cultural view of adults’ perceptions of children’s rights. Social Justice Research, 21(4), 432– 456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-008-0079-7Google Scholar
Chiu, C., Dweck, C. S., Tong, J. Y., & Fu, J. H. (1997). Implicit theories and conceptions of morality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(5), 923–940. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.5.923Google Scholar
Cohrs, J. C., Maes, J., Moschner, B., & Kielmann, S. (2007). Determinants of human rights attitudes and behavior: A comparison and integration of psychological perspectives. Political Psychology, 28(4), 441–469. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2007.00581.xGoogle Scholar
Crowson, M. A. (2009). Right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation as mediators of worldview beliefs on attitudes related to the war on terror. Social Psychology, 40(2), 93–103. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335,40.2.93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crowson, H. M., Brandes, J. A., & Hurst, R. J. (2013). Who opposes rights for persons with physical and intellectual disabilities? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43(Suppl. 2), E307–E318. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12046Google Scholar
Crowson, H. M., & DeBacker, T. K. (2008). Belief, motivational, and ideological correlates of human rights attitudes. The Journal of Social Psychology, 148(3), 293–310. https://doi.org/10.3200/SOCP.148.3.293-310Google Scholar
Crowson, H. M., Debacker, T. K., & Thoma, S. J. (2006). The role of authoritarianism, perceived threat, and need for closure or structure in predicting post-9/11 attitudes and beliefs. The Journal of Social Psychology, 146(6), 733–750. https://doi.org/10.3200/SOCP.146.6.733-750CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1), 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diaz-Veizades, J., Widaman, K. F., Little, T. D., & Gibbs, K. W. (1995). The measurement and structure of human rights attitudes. The Journal of Social Psychology, 135(3), 313–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1995.9713961Google Scholar
Dinesen, P. T., Klemmensen, R., & Nørgaard, A. S. (2016). Attitudes toward immigration: The role of personal predispositions. Political Psychology, 37(1), 55–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12220Google Scholar
Downs, D. M., & Cowan, G. (2012). Predicting the importance of freedom of speech and the perceived harm of hate speech. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(6), 1353–1375. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00902.xGoogle Scholar
Duckitt, J. (2001). A dual-process cognitive motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 41–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(01)80004-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunwoody, P., & McFarland, S. G. (2018). Predicting support for anti-Muslim policies: The role of political traits and threat perception. Political Psychology, 39(1), 89–106. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, S. J. (2002). Student support for lesbian and gay human rights: Findings from a large-scale questionnaire study. In Coyle, A. & Kitzinger, C. (Eds.), Lesbian and gay psychology: New perspectives (pp. 239–254). Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Flores, A. R., & Park, A. (2018). Polarized progress: Social acceptance of LGBT people in 141 countries, 1981 to 2014. The Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law. https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Polarized-Progress-April-2018.pdfGoogle Scholar
Gallup International. (2015). End of year survey 2014: Giving the world a voice for the 38th time.Google Scholar
Gallup Organization. (2013). Republicans, Democrats agree on top foreign policy goals: Partisans disagree most on importance of working to achieve world cooperation. http://www.gallup.com/poll/160649/republicans-democratsagree-top-foreign-policy-goals.aspxGoogle Scholar
Getz, I. (1985). Moral reasoning, religion, and attitudes toward human rights [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
Grace, H. A., & Van Velzer, V. (1951). Attitudes toward the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. International Journal of Opinion and Attitude Research, 5, 541–552.Google Scholar
Graham, J., Nosek, B. A., Haidt, J., Iyer, R., Koleva, S., & Ditto, P. H. (2011). Mapping the moral domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(2), 366–385. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005053-199107000-00016Google Scholar
Hamer, K., McFarland, S., Wlodarczyk, A., et al. (2018, July). Identification with all humanity in connection with global concern, protection of human rights and prosocial activities toward people from different countries – A study in the US, Mexico, Chile and Poland. Paper presented at the 24th Congress of the International Association of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Guelph, Canada.Google Scholar
Heaven, P. C. L. (1999). Attitudes toward women’s rights: Relationships with social dominance orientation and political group identities. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 41(7–8), 605–614. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018851606423Google Scholar
Holsti, O. (2000). Public opinion on human rights in American foreign policy. In Forsythe, D. P. (Ed.), The United States and human rights (pp. 131–174). University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
International Committee of the Red Cross. (2016). People at war: Perspectives from 16 countries. https://www.icrc.org/en/document/people-on-warGoogle Scholar
Johnson, T., Kulesa, P., Cho, Y. I., & Shavitt, S. (2005). The relation between culture and response styles: Evidence from 19 countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, 264–277. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0022022104272905.Google Scholar
Karpov, V. (2002). Religiosity and tolerance in the United States and Poland. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 41(2), 267–288. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5906.00116Google Scholar
Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In Goslin, D. (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research (pp. 347–480). Rand McNally.Google Scholar
Kosterman, R., & Feshbach, S. (1989). Toward a measure of patriotic and nationalistic attitudes. Political Psychology, 10(2), 257–274. https://doi.org/10.2307/3791647Google Scholar
Kull, S., Ramsay, C., Weber, S., et al. (2008). World public opinion on torture. http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/jun08/WPO_Torture_Jun08_packet.pdfGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, J. (2015). Nearly 3 in 10 worldwide see their areas as good for gays. http://www.gallup.com/poll/175520/nearly-worldwide-areas-good-gays.aspx?g_source=SAME_SEX_RELATIONS&g.medium=topic&g_campaign=tilesGoogle Scholar
McFarland, S. (2010a). Personality and support for universal human rights: A review and test of a structural model. Journal of Personality, 78(6), 1735–1763. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00668.xGoogle Scholar
McFarland, S. G. (2010b). Authoritarianism, social dominance, and other roots of generalized prejudice. Political Psychology, 31(3), 425–449. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00765.xGoogle Scholar
McFarland, S. (2012). Support for humanitarian military intervention. In Christie, D. J. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of peace psychology (pp. 515–522). Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
McFarland, S. (2015a). Human rights 101: A brief college-level overview. American Association for the Advancement of Science, Human Rights Coalition. http://www.aaas.org/sites/default/files/content_files/AAAS%20Coalition%20Human%20Rights%20101_0.pdfGoogle Scholar
McFarland, S. (2015b). Culture, individual differences, and support for human rights: A general review. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 21(1), 10–27. https://doi.org/10.1037/pac0000083Google Scholar
McFarland, S. (2017a). International differences in support for human rights. Societies Without Borders, 12(1), 1–20. https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/swb/vol12/iss1/12.Google Scholar
McFarland, S. (2017b). Identification with all humanity: The antithesis of prejudice, and more. In Sibley, C. G. & Barlow, F. K. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook on the psychology of prejudice (pp. 632–654). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McFarland, S., Hackett, J., Hamer, K., et al. (2019). Global human identification and citizenship: A review of psychological studies. Advances in Political Psychology, 6(Suppl. 1), 141–171. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12572Google Scholar
McFarland, S., & Hornsby, W. (2015). An analysis of five measures of global human identification. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45(7), 806–817. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2161Google Scholar
McFarland, S., & Mathews, M. (2005). Who cares about human rights? Political Psychology, 26(3), 365–385. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3792602?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contentsGoogle Scholar
McFarland, S., Webb, M., & Brown, D. (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. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028724Google Scholar
McFarland, S., & Zamora, R. (2020). Human rights developments from the Universal Declaration to the present. In Rubin, N. S. & Flores, R. L. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of psychology and human rights (pp. 25–40). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108348607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moghaddam, F. M., & Vuksanovic, V. (1990). Attitudes and behavior toward human rights across different contexts: The role of right-wing authoritarianism, political ideology, and religiosity. International Journal of Psychology, 25(4), 455–474. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207599008247877Google Scholar
Narvaez, D., Getz, I., Rest, J. R., & Thoma, S. J. (1999). Individual moral judgment and cultural ideologies. Developmental Psychology, 35(2), 478–488. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.35.2.478Google Scholar
Pew Research Center. (2012). Rising tide of restrictions on religion. http://www.pewforum.org/2012/09/20/rising-tide-of-restrictions-on-religion-findings/Google Scholar
Pew Research Center. (2013). The global divide on homosexuality: Greater acceptance in more secular and affluent countries. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2013/06/04/the-global-divide-on-homosexuality/Google Scholar
Pew Research Center. (2015a). Global support for principle of free expression, but opposition to some forms of speech. http://www.pewglobal.org/2015/11/18/global-support-for-principle-of-free-expression-but-opposition-to-some-forms-of-speech/Google Scholar
Pew Research Center. (2015b). Global attitudes and trends: U.S. interrogation methods. http://www.pewglobal.org/2015/06/23/global-publics-back-u-s-on-fighting-isis-but-are-critical-of-post-911-torture/bop-report-27/Google Scholar
Pew Research Center. (2020a). Democratic rights popular globally but commitment to them not always strong. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/02/27/democratic-rights-popular-globally-but-commitment-to-them-not-always-strong/?utm_source=Pew+Research+Center&utm_campaign=5d03645560-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_03_5_20&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_3e953b9b70–5d03645560–400002289Google Scholar
Pew Research Center. (2020b). The global divide on homosexuality persists: But increasing acceptance in many countries over past two decades. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/06/25/global-divide-on-homosexuality-persists/?utm_source=Pew+Research+Center&utm_campaign=f63bd74d5b-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_06_22_02_08&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_3e953b9b70-f63bd74d5b-400002289.Google Scholar
Rest, J. (1986). Moral development: Advances in research and theory. Praeger.Google Scholar
Schatz, R. T., Staub, E., & Lavine, H. (1999). On the varieties of national attachment: Blind versus constructive patriotism. Political Psychology, 20(1), 151–174. https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00140Google Scholar
Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content of structure and values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In Zanna, M. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1–65). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6Google Scholar
Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139175043Google Scholar
Sommer, G., & Stellmacher, J. (2009). Menschen-rechte und Menschenrechtsbildung [Human rights and human rights education]. Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-91898-3Google Scholar
Spini, D., & Doise, W. (1998). Organizing principles of involvement in human rights and their social anchoring in value priorities. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28(4), 603–622. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199807/08)28:4<603::AID-EJSP884>3.0.CO;2-P3.0.CO;2-P>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stellmacher, J., & Sommer, G. (2008). Human rights education: An evaluation of university seminars. Social Psychology, 39(1), 70–80. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335.39.1.70Google Scholar
Stellmacher, J., Sommer, G., & Brähler, E. (2005). The cognitive representation of human rights: Knowledge, importance, and commitment. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 11(3), 267–292. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327949pac1103_4Google Scholar
Stolerman, D., & Lagnado, D. (2018). The moral foundations of human rights attitudes. Political Psychology, 41(3), 439–459. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12539Google Scholar
Sullivan, J. L., Piereson, J., & Marcus, G. E. (1982). Political tolerance and American democracy. The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Swami, V., Nader, I. W., Pietschnig, J., Stieger, S., Tran, U. S., & Voracek, M. (2012). Personality and individual difference correlates of attitudes toward human rights and civil liberties. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(4), 443–447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.04.015Google Scholar
Viki, G. T., Osgood, D., & Phillips, S. (2013). Dehumanization and self-reported proclivity to torture prisoners of war. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(3), 325–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.11.006Google Scholar
WorldPublicOpinion.org. (2008a). World publics reject torture. http://worldpublicopinion.net/world-publics-reject-torture/Google Scholar
WorldPublicOpinion.org. (2008b). World publics see government as responsible for ensuring basic healthcare, food, and education needs. http://worldpublicopinion.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/WPO_Socio-Econ_Global_rpt.pdfGoogle Scholar
WorldPublicOpinion.org. (2009). Majorities reject banning defamation of religion: 20 nation poll. http://worldpublicopinion.net/majorities-reject-banning-defamation-of-religion-20-nation-poll/Google Scholar
World Values Survey. (n.d.). Retrieved 18 May 2016, from http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/WVSOnline.jspGoogle Scholar
Wuthnow, R., & Lewis, V. (2008). Religion and altruistic U.S. foreign policy goals: Evidence from a national survey of church members. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 47(2), 191–209. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5906.2008.00402.xGoogle Scholar
Zellman, G. L., & Sears, D. O. (1971). Childhood origins of tolerance for dissent. Journal of Social Issues, 27(2), 109–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1971.tb00656.xGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×