Bakgrund & frågeställning Sverigedemokraterna bildades1988 av tidigare aktiva inom nazistiska och fascistiska rörelser. Idag är partiet Sveriges tredje största. Partiets bakgrund, växande stöd och senaste framgångar i valet 2014 parallellt med uppmärksammande skandaler väckte nyfikenhet: Hur kommunicerar ett parti med så tydlig historia och en del ofördelaktiga avslöjanden för att bli accepterat? Avgränsning av kommunikationen gjordes till de tre valfilmerna som gjorts inför riksdagsvalen 2010 och 2014. Analysen redogör för hur olika element, retoriska och semiotiska, samverkar för att konstruera ett budskap, både implicit och explicit, för att övertyga. Vidare diskuteras likheter och skillnader i materialet från 2010 och 2014 och vem målgruppen kan tänkas vara, för att se åt vilket håll utvecklingen gått. Teori & metod Teori inom semiotik och retorik används tillsammans med teorier om politisk kommunikation för att besvara frågeställningarna. Filmerna anlayseras med verktyg som logos, ethos, pathos, genus deliberativum, konnotaion, kommutationstest och intertextualitet från fälten. Analys & slutsats Analysen redogör för en mycket pathos-betonad första valfilm 2010, de andra ses som mer ethos- och logos-betonade. I slutsatsen diskuteras att det skett en utveckling av vilka som är "vi" och "dom". Kommunikation har även gått från väldigt explicit till mer implicit. Detta säger dels något om hur bilden av mottagaren förändrats men kan även vara en strategi för att få en mjukare framtoning. Förändringarna visar på en professionalisering av Sverigedemokraternas kommunikation där filmerna från 2014 har två målgrupper: "Jimmie – på riktigt": stärka etablerade relationer och "Låt er inte tystas": vinna över skeptikerna. Nyckelord: Sverigedemokraterna, valfilm, retorik, semiotik, ethos, pathos, logos, Jimmie Åkesson, strategi, argumentation, implicit, explicit.

No description available.

Implicit prejudice, and in particular, the Implicit Association Test (IAT), are paradigmatic examples of psychological concepts and research methods that have recently enjoyed great publicity and accessibility. However, little is known about the possible reflexive consequences of this popularization for the public understanding of prejudice, and by implication, for the formulation of social policy aimed at the reduction of prejudice and racism. Specifically, how does the public interpret and contextualize the claims of the IAT and implicit prejudice? With what social and political preoccupations does this operationalization of implicit prejudice resonate? Furthermore, how do members of the public experience and interpret the IAT as both a scientific instrument and as a bearer of psychological truth? In answer to these questions, this dissertation comprises a report of two empirical studies of public encounters with the IAT and the concepts of implicit prejudice. The first of these focused on popular responses to IAT research in the New York Times. Employing a discourse analytic approach to reader comments, it identified the social and psychological concerns against which the public makes sense of the IAT. In responding to the IAT, readers drew on skeptical and confessional discourses to position themselves reflexively in relation to its claims. I argue that these discourses constitute a space within which strong injunctions to self-scrutiny, impartiality and objectivity are established as moral-psychological ideals. Building on these findings, the second study examined the IAT as a discursive practice through a focus on the lived experience of taking the test. Recruited participants took the IAT, and were subsequently interviewed to elicit moment-by-moment accounts of this process. Hermeneutic-phenomenological analysis of these accounts revealed thematic concerns that both resonated with and augmented those in the analysis of public discourse. In particular, the IAT was experienced as a vivid demonstration of the operationalization of "implicit bias". I argue that the test embodies and communicates this paradigm to test-takers, and therefore functions as a psychological pedagogical tool. The dissertation closes by discussing the implications of these analyses for public understandings of, and responses to, prejudice.

Implicit prejudice, and in particular, the Implicit Association Test (IAT), are paradigmatic examples of psychological concepts and research methods that have recently enjoyed great publicity and accessibility. However, little is known about the possible reflexive consequences of this popularization for the public understanding of prejudice, and by implication, for the formulation of social policy aimed at the reduction of prejudice and racism. Specifically, how does the public interpret and contextualize the claims of the IAT and implicit prejudice? With what social and political preoccupations does this operationalization of implicit prejudice resonate? Furthermore, how do members of the public experience and interpret the IAT as both a scientific instrument and as a bearer of psychological truth? In answer to these questions, this dissertation comprises a report of two empirical studies of public encounters with the IAT and the concepts of implicit prejudice. The first of these focused on popular responses to IAT research in the New York Times. Employing a discourse analytic approach to reader comments, it identified the social and psychological concerns against which the public makes sense of the IAT. In responding to the IAT, readers drew on skeptical and confessional discourses to position themselves reflexively in relation to its claims. I argue that these discourses constitute a space within which strong injunctions to self-scrutiny, impartiality and objectivity are established as moral-psychological ideals. Building on these findings, the second study examined the IAT as a discursive practice through a focus on the lived experience of taking the test. Recruited participants took the IAT, and were subsequently interviewed to elicit moment-by-moment accounts of this process. Hermeneutic-phenomenological analysis of these accounts revealed thematic concerns that both resonated with and augmented those in the analysis of public discourse. In particular, the IAT was experienced as a vivid demonstration of the operationalization of "implicit bias". I argue that the test embodies and communicates this paradigm to test-takers, and therefore functions as a psychological pedagogical tool. The dissertation closes by discussing the implications of these analyses for public understandings of, and responses to, prejudice.

国立情報学研究所で電子化したコンテンツを使用している。

"Strong situations" have been shown to decrease behavioral variability, thereby attenuating the criterion-related validity of non-ability individual differences for criteria such as job performance (Barrick&Mount, 1993; Meyer, Dalal,&Bonaccio, 2009). However, it has been suggested that individuals, based on individual differences in implicit motives, may impute discrepant psychological meaning to social stimuli like situational strength--a process sometimes known as differential framing (James&McIntyre, 1996). If different psychological interpretations are attached to strong situation stimuli (e.g., Meyer, Dalal,&Hermida, 2010), an interesting behavioral "double-edged sword" is possible. On the one hand, behaviors pertinent to "primary criteria" (i.e., criteria for which external situational influences and pressures lead to targeted behavioral homogeneity) may occur among those who would not normally engage in them. But, at the same time, behaviors pertinent to "secondary criteria" (i.e., unintended, unforeseen, and potentially reactionary behaviors and/or attitudes) might also increase for some individuals (i.e., those with certain implicit motive characteristics). In other words, high situational strength may simultaneously constrain behavioral variability in primary criteria while serving as a stimulus for differential framing, thereby expanding variability on secondary criteria. The purpose of the present dissertation was twofold: 1) to explore the degree to which situational strength is differentially framed, and 2) to ascertain how the differential framing of situational strength may lead to unintended secondary outcomes. Study 1 findings indicate that, to a partial extent, situational strength is differentially framed by individuals with different implicit motives. Study 2 findings are largely consistent with extant situational strength theory, though partially inconsistent with study predictions.

[Truncated abstract] One aim of the present research program was to investigate motivational response inclinations toward high-caloric food at implicit and explicit processing levels with unipolar measures to account for ambivalence. A second aim was to examine the extent of the influence of these implicit and explicit processes on unhealthy eating behaviors, and specifically investigate why people reporting avoid motivational inclinations continue to indulge in high-fat foods. The aim of Study 1 was to examine discordance between implicit and explicit attitudes toward high-fat food in groups that differed in preference for high-fat food. Using a bipolar version of the Implicit Association Test (IAT), a group difference was found in implicit attitudes toward high-fat food with a trend toward concordance. The aims of Study 2 were to examine if concordance between implicit and explicit processes would be greater if one accounted for motivational ambivalence within and between implicit and explicit processing levels, and to test the influence of these processes on food choice behavior. Using a unipolar version of the IAT, a pattern of concordance was found between implicit and explicit inclinations in most participants, except for those reporting weak avoid and strong approach inclinations. Further, implicit avoid and explicit avoid inclinations were found to predict food choice behavior in a context that made body and weight concerns salient. A parallel study (Study 3) was conducted with a high-caloric food that is viewed very ambivalently by society (i.e., chocolate) to determine if societal ambivalence is reflected in implicit associations, and to test the influence of implicit and explicit processes on food choice behavior. In contrast to Study 2, results indicated that all groups were implicitly ambivalent toward chocolate. Further, implicit approach and explicit avoid inclinations were found to antagonistically predict behavior suggesting that the proximal benefits of chocolate indulgence tend to outweigh the distal consequences. ... Results showed that when the unhealthy consequences of high-fat food consumption were primed, implicit avoid motivational inclinations toward high-fat food could be differentially activated and influence choice of certain high-fat foods. In conclusion, this research program found evidence for eating-related ambivalence within and between implicit and explicit processing levels which underscores the importance of utilizing unipolar measures in research investigating motivational response inclinations toward food and other substances. Further, implicit and explicit processes were found to influence high-fat food choice behavior in an antagonistic pattern with implicit approach inclinations conflicting with explicit avoid inclinations when health and weight concerns were not salient, providing support for the additive predictive pattern of food choice. A key theoretical implication of this research program is that the integration of the dual process models (e.g., Strack & Deutsch, 2004) with the ambivalence model of substance craving (e.g., Breiner, Stritzke, & Lang, 1999) can advance the understanding of competing motivational response inclinations toward high-fat foods at the implicit and explicit levels.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--State University of New York at Binghamton, Department of Psychology, 2009. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.A.) - Carleton University, 2007. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 124-126). Also available in electronic format on the Internet.

Title from first page of PDF document. Includes bibliographical references (p. 32-37).