No description available.

Cette thèse constitue une étude approfondie menée à partir d'un corpus inédit de sources de la pratique, sur la question de l'identité marchande et des formes de la domination sociale à Marseille, entre 1380 et 1430. À travers l'expérience individuelle de deux marchands contemporains et homonymes, les Bertrand Rocaforti, ce travail vise à une meilleure connaissance des élites urbaines dans une ville importante de l'Occident méditerranéen de la fin du Moyen Âge. Le recours à une démarche microhistorique, nous donne l'opportunité de dégager les grandes lignes de la carrière des deux Rocaforti dans un contexte difficile, celui des règnes de Louis II et Louis III d'Anjou, afin de mesurer les composantes de leur domination. Car les Rocaforti font partie, chacun à leur mesure, des élites de leurs communautés et appartiennent à des réseaux nombreux et croisés. Cette étude s'attarde par ailleurs sur l'influence des Franciscains - et notamment de leurs théories économiques dans la construction de l'identité marchande du début du XVe siècle -, en revenant en particulier sur les formes d'actions publiques des élites urbaines réalisées au nom du bien commun. / This thesis is an original corpus, pragmatic source led, indepth study in to the questions of a merchant's identity and forms of social dominance in Marseilles between 1380 and 1430. This work aims to achieve a better understanding of the urban elite within the context of a influential Western Mediterranean city at the end of the Middle Ages, through the experiences of two contemporary and honomous merchants:the Bertrand Rocafortis. A microhistoric approach allows us to shine a light on the careers of the two Rocafortis in a difficult context, that of the reigns of Louis II and Louis III d'Anjou and therefore analyse the different componants of their social dominance. Both Rocafortis belonged to elite urban circles and numerous socio-economic networks. This study will also focus on the influence of the Franciscans and notably their economic theories and how they impacted the construction of a merchant's identity at the beginning of the XVth century, in particular acts of the urban elite that were performed in the interest of the public good.

Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) suggests there are five distinct moral dimensions, which define morality as a whole. MFT can be broken down into two groups binding: in group/loyalty, authority/respect, and purity/sanctity-which encompass group morality. Harm/Care, fairness/reciprocity are individualizing dimensions, which highlight individual morality. Recent work has found MFT predicts sociopolitical ideologies, as well as sociopolitical attitudes. In an effort to better understand the existing relationships we investigate MFT as a predictor of sociopolitical parties, and attitudes Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). We also draw on similarities between Individualism/Collectivism and MFT. Specifically we demonstrate individualizing foundations, and dimensions of individualism predict SDO, where as Binding dimensions and dimensions of Collectivism relate to RWA.

Workplace bullying is a recently recognized problem within organizations. Two personalities may be theoretically related, and may be able to predict this aggressive behavior: right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation. However, it is still unclear how to measure right-wing authoritarianism as a construct. Two surveys were distributed. The first was to assess the factor structure inconsistency among the literature. A three-factor operationalization was supported. Analysis of the second survey examined the relationship between the aggression dimension of right-wing authoritarianism, dangerous worldview and workplace bullying; as well as the relationship between social dominance orientation and competitive worldview on workplace bullying. No significant relationship was found between authoritarian aggression and workplace bullying, however, social dominance orientation fully mediated competitive worldview and workplace bullying. Theoretical implications, limitations, and practical applications are discussed.

No description available.

No description available.

Cette recherche s’inscrit dans la lignée des travaux de psychologie sociale du travail consacrés à la compréhension du comportement organisationnel des individus à travers le prisme de la justice et de la discrimination. Dans un premier temps, nous nous sommes intéressés aux pratiques organisationnelles inhérentes à la justice distributive. Dans un second temps, aux mécanismes psychosociaux individuels et inter-individuels engendrant de la discrimination. Enfin, aux environnements normatifs de travail orientés ou non vers la justice sociale.Dans une première étude, nous avons étudié l’influence respective de différents critères de justice organisationnelle susceptibles d’orienter les décisions de distribution de primes financières ; soit les critères d’égalité, de besoin des subordonnés, et, en termes d’équité, la performance individuelle, la performance collective et l’allégeance. Nous avons observé (sur N = 1135) que chacune des trois variables d’équité prime sur l’égalité et sur le besoin. Nos analyses ont également démontré l’existence d’effets d’interaction entre les divers critères de distribution.Nous avons ensuite examiné (par 7 études) la nature des relations entretenues par divers facteurs psychosociaux que sont l’Orientation à la Dominance Sociale (ODS), la Croyance en un Monde du Travail Juste (CMTJ), la norme d’Allégeance et la Propension à Discriminer (PAD). Nos résultats (sur (N = 975) nous ont permis d’observer leur influence mutuelle ainsi que de déterminer le rôle médiateur de l’Allégeance entre l’Egalitarisme et la PAD, celui de la CMTJ entre l’Egalitarisme et la PAD et entre l’Allégeance et l’ODS, mais également le rôle médiateur de l’ODS entre la CMTJ et la PAD.Enfin, au niveau de l’environnement de travail, il nous a semblé opportun d’évaluer le pouvoir exercé par l’environnement normatif sur les concepts précités. Nous avons, dans ce but, conceptualisé une Matrice Cognitivo-Comportementale de Perpétuation du Système (MCCPS) dont nous avons ensuite, dans une étude, testé la validité. Nos résultats (sur N = 457) démontrent que les salariés travaillant dans un environnement de type AH (i.e. accentuant la hiérarchisation sociale) adhérent davantage à la MCCPS que les salariés travaillant dans un environnement de type RH (i.e. réduisant la hiérarchisation sociale). / This research is in line with the studies of social psychology of work dedicated to the understanding of individuals' organizational behavior through the prism of justice and discrimination. In the first instance, we were interested in the organizational practices related to the distributive justice. In the second part, to the individual and interpersonal psychosocial mechanisms which generate discrimination. Finally, to the normative environments of work oriented or not towards the social justice.In the first study, we analyzed the respective influence of various criteria of organizational justice susceptible to direct the decisions regarding the distribution of financial bonus ; either the equality criteria, subordinates' needs, and, in terms of equity, the individual performance, the collective performance and the allegiance. We have observed (by N = 1135) that each of the three equity variables outweighs the equality and the need.Our analysis have also showed the existence of interaction effects between the various distribution criteria.Then, we examined (by 7 studies) the nature of the relationships maintained by various psychosocial factors that are the Social Dominance Orientation (SDO), the Belief in a Just World of Work (BJWW), the Allegiance norm and the propensity to discriminate (PTD). Our results (on (N = 975) have allowed us to observe their mutual influence and also to determinate the mediator role of the Allegiance between the Egalitarianism and the PTD, the one of BJWW between the Egalitarianism and the PTD and between the Allegiance and the SDO, and also the mediator role of the SDO between the BJWW and the PTD.Finally, regarding the work environment, it seemed appropriate to us to assess the power exercised by the normative environment on the concepts aforesaid. We have, for this purpose, conceptualized a Matrix Cognitive-Behavioural of the Perpetuation of the System (MCBPS) about which we then tested its validity in a study. Our results (on N=457) demonstrate that employees who work in a type AH environment (i.e. that accentuate the social hierarchy) adhere more to the MCBPS that the employees who work in a type RH environment (i.e. that decrease the social hierarchy).

<p>Intergroup relations are characterised by favourable and unfavourable biases. Towards one’s own group these biases are mostly favourable – ingroup favouritism. Research has, however, shown that outgroup favouritism, that is, the preference for a group to which the person does not belong, also permeates intergroup relations. Several theories such as social identity theory, social dominance theory, and system justification theory offer explanations of the dynamics of intergroup relations and biases. Despite not strictly being a theory of intergroup relations, right-wing authoritarianism also offers an explanation of intergroup bias by accounting for prejudice and ethnocentrism. Likewise, ideological conservatism has been shown to influence intergroup relations. </p><p>Based within these theories, this dissertation attempts to explain the social-psychological mechanisms regulating in- and outgroup favouritism. More specifically, Study I examines issues of power and legitimacy in relation to social perception and gender. Studies II and III examine the relationships between social psychological variables and affirmative action, which is aimed at diminishing inequalities between social groups. Together, the studies showed that gender plays a role in intergroup bias, both as an independent variable and as an object of social discrimination. Conservative ideologies predicted ingroup favouritism, but variably. Attitudes towards affirmative action were influenced by the way this issue is semantically framed. The results are discussed in relation to the theories of intergroup relations exposed above and the pertinent issue of attitude ambivalence in understanding outgroup favouritism.</p>

Intergroup relations are characterised by favourable and unfavourable biases. Towards one’s own group these biases are mostly favourable – ingroup favouritism. Research has, however, shown that outgroup favouritism, that is, the preference for a group to which the person does not belong, also permeates intergroup relations. Several theories such as social identity theory, social dominance theory, and system justification theory offer explanations of the dynamics of intergroup relations and biases. Despite not strictly being a theory of intergroup relations, right-wing authoritarianism also offers an explanation of intergroup bias by accounting for prejudice and ethnocentrism. Likewise, ideological conservatism has been shown to influence intergroup relations. Based within these theories, this dissertation attempts to explain the social-psychological mechanisms regulating in- and outgroup favouritism. More specifically, Study I examines issues of power and legitimacy in relation to social perception and gender. Studies II and III examine the relationships between social psychological variables and affirmative action, which is aimed at diminishing inequalities between social groups. Together, the studies showed that gender plays a role in intergroup bias, both as an independent variable and as an object of social discrimination. Conservative ideologies predicted ingroup favouritism, but variably. Attitudes towards affirmative action were influenced by the way this issue is semantically framed. The results are discussed in relation to the theories of intergroup relations exposed above and the pertinent issue of attitude ambivalence in understanding outgroup favouritism.

The United States has the highest incarceration rate of any country. The causes for the large number of prisoners can be traced, in part, to a politicized war on crime that resulted in harsh sentencing and high recidivism rates. Prisoner education provides the potential for slowing the revolving door of prison by helping to create engaged citizens, who are committed to bettering themselves and their communities. However, there is a paucity of support for programs such as Pell Grants, which could facilitate emancipatory education in prisons. The purpose of this work is to examine why prisoners are provided few meaningful educational opportunities while incarcerated. This study seeks to understand the genealogy of prisoner education policy through an examination of the debate surrounding the 1994 Omnibus Crime Bill and its prohibition of Pell Grants for prisoners, as well as the 2008 Second Chance Act and its reentry programs. The study analyzes the ideological underpinnings of key decision makers and how their values are often embedded in the narratives of neoliberalism. In addition, the work examines elite stakeholders’ discursive attempts, both manifest and subtle, to influence and maintain social policy through the creation of legitimizing myths, including the viewpoints that prisoners are hopelessly flawed or that they have potential only as human capital. Counter-hegemonic discourse is also described. The study methods are critical discourse analysis which looks at the ways text and talk maintain inequities in society and critical policy analysis. Utilizing transcripts from legislative debates, the study analyzes the discourses of members of Congress to expose the tropes that often lie beneath the surface of the debate over prisoner education. Their rhetoric appears to generate and maintain widespread support for legislation that is frequently deleterious to marginalized out-groups. The study should add to the literature examining the role of legitimizing myths that maintain inequities in educational access.