Intersectionality as researchers’ and participants’ resource: A commentary on the contributions to the Special Issue

Ο στόχος αυτού του σχολίου είναι να συσχετίσει τις εργασίες που συνεισφέρουν σε αυτό το ειδικό τεύχος με τις ευρύτερες κατευθύνσεις και προσανατολισμούς της ψυχολογικής έρευνας για τη διαθεματικότητα. Υποστηρίζεται ότι, από κοινού με την υπάρχουσα ψυχολογική έρευνα, οι συνεισφορές στο παρόν τεύχος είτε διερευνούν πώς οι κοινωνικοί φορείς αναπαριστούν στερεοτυπικά τις/τους άλλους υπό το πρίσμα των διασταυρούμενων κοινωνικών ταυτοτήτων τους είτε επικεντρώνονται στις πιθανές ψυχολογικές και κοινωνικές επιπτώσεις της υπαγωγής σε υποτιμημένες διαθεματικές κατηγορίες και ταυτότητες (συμπεριλαμβανομένου του φύλου). Υποστηρίζεται επίσης ότι ενώ η διαθεματικότητα αποτελεί κυρίως μέλημα και αναλυτικό φακό των ερευνητ(ρι)ών, η μελλοντική ερευνητική ατζέντα, όπως υποδεικνύεται και από ορισμένες από τις μελέτες που συνεισφέρουν, θα πρέπει να περιλαμβάνει τη μελέτη της διαθεματικότητας ως μελήματος και αποθέματος των συμμετεχουσών/όντων και τη διερεύνηση των (εγγύς και απομακρυσμένων) επιπτώσεων της χρήσης της σε διαφορετικά κοινωνικά και ρητορικά πλαίσια.The aim of this commentary is to relate the papers contributing to this special issue to the broader directions and orientations of psychological research on intersectionality.  It is argued that, in common with existing psychological research, the contributions to the current issue either explore how social actors stereotype others in light of their intersecting social identities or focus on the potential psychological and social implications of holding intersecting subordinate identities (including gender). It is also maintained that while intersectionality has mainly constituted the researcher’s concern and analytic lens, a future research agenda, as it is indicated by some of the contributions, should involve the study of intersectionality as participants’ concern and resource and the investigation of the (proximal and distal) implications of its use in different social and rhetorical contexts

Essentialism in social representations of citizenship: an analysis of Greeks’ and migrants’ discourse

Following a Social Representations approach, the article examines the representations of citizenship held by both migrants and Greek citizens in Greece after the announcement of a heavily debated citizenship legislation. Essentialism, a way of representing social categories as holding an underlying essence that determines their characteristics, was used as an analytical tool to understand the inclusive or exclusive function of representations of citizenship towards migrants. Findings showed that Greeks construct representations based on ethnic, civic, and cultural ideas, while migrants construct representation of citizenship based on civic and cultural ideas. Essentialism was a way of constructing ethnic and cultural representations of citizenship and functioned in both exclusive and inclusive ways, but assimilatory terms accordingly. Civic and cultural representations of citizenship were constructed in nonessentialist ways and functioned in inclusive ways. However, from Greeks' perspective, civic inclusion was conditioned upon an often-questioned legality of migrants and upon cultural assimilation terms. Studying both the content and the essentialist/nonessentialist formulation of representations of citizenship is an important tool in understanding the politics of inclusion and exclusion of citizens in the social arena

Space as a Resource and Implication of (Inter)group Relations and Rights: Analyzing Discourse on the Refugee Issue in Greece

Η μελέτη αυτή στοχεύει στην διερεύνηση του τρόπου με τον οποίο χρησιμοποιούνται ρητορικές κατασκευές του χώρου και της ταυτότητας σε συνεντεύξεις σχετικά με την υποδοχή και τα δικαιώματα των προσφύγων στην Ελλάδα. Το αναλυτικό μας υλικό προήλθε από 19 ατομικές ημιδομημένες συνεντεύξεις που πραγματοποιήθηκαν στη Θεσσαλονίκη, ενώ η ανάλυση βασίστηκε στην κριτική κοινωνική λογοψυχολογία. Η ανάλυση έδειξε τους πολλαπλούς τρόπους με τους οποίους οι συμμετέχοντες κατασκευάζουν τη διασταύρωση της ταυτότητας του χώρου και των σχέσεων μεταξύ ομάδων. Από τη μια πλευρά, η εγγύτητα και η επαφή με τους πρόσφυγες αναπαραστήθηκεως μια δυνητική συνθήκη που δικιαολογεί αντιδράσεις κατά της εγκατάστασης και της ένταξής τους. Η απόσταση και η γκετοποίηση ομάδων από την άλλη πλευρά, αναπραστήθηκε ως επαρκής προϋπόθεση ανομίας εκ μέρους των προσφύγων και, ως εκ τούτου, ως βασική πηγή προβλημάτων στις σχέσεις μεταξύ των ομάδων. Επιπλέον, η ανάλυση έδειξε ότι οι διακρίσεις με βάση χωρικά όρια σε αυτούς που είναι «εντός» και αυτούς που παραμένουν «εκτός» συμπίπτουν και με συμβολικά όρια, ενώ βιοπολιτικές στρατηγικές, που εισάγονται με την προσφυγή σε περιορισμένο χώρο και την έλλειψη υλικών πόρων, χρησιμοποιούνται κατά τη συνάρθρωση επιχειρημάτων για τον περιορισμό των δικαιωμάτων των προσφύγων.This study aims at exploring the way in which constructions of space and identity are mobilized in interviews on refugees’ reception and entitlements in Greece. Our analytic material was derived from individual semi-structured interviews conducted with 19 people of Greek nationality in Thessaloniki, while the analysis has been based on the principles of critical discursive social psychology. Analysis indicated the multiple ways that participants have available to construct the intersection of place identity and intergroup relations. On the one hand, proximity and contact with refugees were represented as a potentially justified basis for reactions against their settlement and integration. Intergroup distance and separation (ghettoization), on the other hand, were treated as a sufficient condition of anomy on the part of the refugees, and, by implication, as a source of problematic intergroup relations. Furthermore, analysis showed that constructions of “insider” and “outsider” coincided with symbolic boundaries, while biopoliticalstrategies, introduced through recourse to space limitation and scarcity of material resources, were employed to articulate arguments which supported the restriction of refugees’ entitlements

Introduction: Political Psychology in an ‘Anti’-politics Era

Political psychology constitutes a problem-oriented and interdisciplinary field (Staerkle, 2015). In fact, being born in the decades between the First and Second World Wars, it is intrinsically characterized by the concern to study and cope with social and political crises and their implications (Nesbitt-Larking & Kinnvall, 2012). Its theoretical tools and concepts were developed in order to cast light on phenomena such as mass psychology and collective action, racism, the rise of fascism and authoritarianism. The role of psychology in the study of these phenomena was, as Moscovici (1988) argued, not only necessary but also functional

INTERTWINED AND INCOMPATIBLE IDENTITIES IN THE ARGUMENTATION AGAINST THE INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF SAME SEX COUPLES’ COHABITATION AGREEMENT: "GREEK-ORTHODOXY" AND HOMOSEXUALITY

This research focuses on the ways in which "Greek-Orthodox" social identity is constructed and used as an argumentative resource against the institutionalization of same-sex couples’ cohabitation agreement. The analytic material consisted of comments put forward in the context of a public online deliberation on this issue held in Greece in 2015. Analysis, which used the principles of critical discursive psychology and rhetoric, highlights the construction of a solid "Greek-Orthodox" identity in which the concepts of "nation" and "religion" presuppose each other while at the same time they establish heteronormativity. Moreover, homosexuality is constructed as a “sin” that is incompatible with the "Greek-Orthodox" identity while the legal protection of same-sex relationships is represented as a threat to the Greek nation. These constructions are orientated to manage social accountability concerns of the commentators, while at the same time they potentially contribute to the preservation of hierarchical structures and power relations aiming to undermine LGBTQI+ claims.     Key words: Cohabitation agreement, Identities, Same-sex couple

“A Lesser of Two Evils”:Arguments Around Same-Sex Parenting Rights in University Students’ Discourse in the Republic of Cyprus

Introduction: While there is extensive quantitative research on factors related to support/opposition of attitudes towards same-sex parenting (SSP), relevant qualitative research is limited, despite the need to identify subtle and ambivalent forms of prejudice. In this study we examined ways that young people, university students at the Republic of Cyprus formulated favourable arguments that constructed only at first appearance supportive representations of SSP. Methods: Data were collected in 2021–2022, through 11 focus group discussions with undergraduate and graduate students (26 females and 16 males, 18–27 years old), of different fields of study. Following the principles of discursive/rhetorical analysis, we identified three argumentative lines, all of which included contrasts and comparisons. Results: The first argumentative line juxtaposed SSP to being raised in an orphanage, the second to irresponsible/disadvantaged (single) parenting and the third compared the upbringing of children in same-sex to that in heterosexual families. All arguments demonstrate a seemingly supportive stance towards SSP rights. Nevertheless, drawing on heteronormative norms, they construct SSP as “a lesser of two evils” and undermine seemingly positive attributes of same-sex families, through reference to children’s exposure to adverse societal reactions. Policy Implications: We discuss the implications of the findings for SSP social recognition and for sexual citizenship. We also discuss the implications of this approach for attitude research on the topic, underscoring the ideological implications of ‘attitudinal discourse’.</p

‘They're more than animals’::Refugees' accounts of racially motivated violence

Previous discursive research has found that minority group members may deny or downplay the existence of discrimination. However, to date little research has addressed the issue of violence against minority group members. This study therefore draws on interviews with asylum seekers and refugees in a Scottish city to analyse their reports of violence committed against them. One form of reporting violence was by way of a complaint available to any speaker, in making no reference to attributes of attackers of victim. When racism was alleged, it was presented as a tentative, reluctant or 'last resort' explanation. The descriptions offered by interviewees reflected the contributions made by the interviewer, highlighting the ways in which these reports are interactional co-productions. The results suggest that accounts from victims of seemingly racially motivated violence may function in similar ways to 'new racism' in making racism seem to 'disappear'. These findings point to the potential difficulties that arise in identifying and looking to challenge instances of ‘new racism’

(Self)stereotypical constructions of Greekness in the period of crisis: a discourse analytic approach

Η παρούσα εργασία πραγματεύεται την κατασκευή της ελληνικότητας τα χρόνια της κρίσης στο λόγο Ελλήνων πολιτών, εξετάζοντας πώς αυτή δομείται μέσα από τη χρήση αυτό-στερεοτύπων, αλλά και πώς αναπαρίσταται μέσα από τα στερεότυπα που θεωρούν οι συμμετέχοντες/ουσες στην έρευνα ότι αναπαράγονται στο λόγο των μη Ελλήνων. Για τους σκοπούς της έρευνας πραγματοποιήθηκαν πέντε ομάδες εστίασης, αποτελούμενες από πέντε άτομα η καθεμιά και για την ανάλυση των συζητήσεων εφαρμόστηκε  ανάλυση λόγου εστιασμένη στο περιεχόμενο. Η ανάλυση έδειξε ότι η κρίση συνδέεται από τους συμμετέχοντες με αλλοίωση της ελληνικής εθνικής ταυτότητας, η οποία προσδιορίζεται διττά ως απομάκρυνση από τις ιδεολογικές και φιλοσοφικές βάσεις του αρχαίου ελληνικού πολιτισμού, αλλά και ως «επιμόλυνση» από το δυτικό ατομικισμό και καταναλωτισμό.  Οι άλλοι Ευρωπαίοι χωρίζονται σε φιλικά προσκείμενους προς την Ελλάδα και τον ελληνικό λαό και σε εχθρικά διακείμενους με βάση δύο διασταυρούμενες διχοτομίες. Η πρώτη διαφοροποιεί τον Ευρωπαϊκό Βορρά από το Νότο, ενώ η δεύτερη το λαό από τις κοινωνικές και πολιτικές ελίτ.  Οι συμμετέχοντες συζητούν για τα στερεότυπα και τις λειτουργίες τους και παίρνουν αποστάσεις από αυτά δηλώνοντας ότι αναπαράγουν γενικευτικό και μεροληπτικό λόγο. Τα ευρήματα συζητιούνται ως προς τις δυνητικές ιδεολογικές συνέπειες των στερεοτύπων υπό το πρίσμα των παραδοχών της θεωρίας Δικαιολόγησης του Συστήματος, του Μοντέλου του Περιεχομένου των Στερεοτύπων (SCM), αλλά και της Δια/του Λόγου Ψυχολογίας.This paper discusses the discursive construction of Greekness in the period of crisis in focus group discussions with Greek citizens. It particularly explores how Greekness is constructed by the use of self-stereotypes, but also by stereotypical representations attributed to others (non Greeks) by the participants. For the purposes of the study five focus groups -consisting of five people each- were implemented. Discussions were analysed by the tools and concepts of content based discourse analysis. Analysis indicated that crisis is linked by the participants to changes in Greek national identity which are determined both as a departure from the ideological and philosophical foundations of the ancient Greek civilization and/or as "contamination" by western individualism and consumerism. The other Europeans are divided into friendly and hostile towards Greece and the Greek people on the basis of two intersecting dichotomies. The first distinguishes North from South Europeans and the second differentiates between the people and the social and political elites. Finally, the participants discuss stereotypes and their functions and take distance from them on the grounds that they reproduce generalized and discriminatory discourse. The findings are discussed in terms of the ideological consequences of stereotypes in the light of the assumptions put forward by System Justification Theory, the Stereotype Content Model (SCT) and Discursive Psychology

Race trouble: Attending to race and racism in online interaction

This article advocates the concept of Race Trouble as a way of synthesizing variation in racial discourse, and as a way of studying how social interaction and institutional life continue to be organized by conceptions of “race” and “racism”. Our analysis of an online discussion at a South African University about the defensibility of a characterization of (black) student protesters as “savages” revealed a number of familiar strategies: participants avoided explicit racism, denied racism, and denied racism on behalf of others. However, the aim of analysis was not to identify the “real” racism, but to show how race and racism were used in the interaction to develop perspectives on transformation in the institution, to produce social division in the University, and to create ambivalently racialized and racializing subject positions. We demonstrate how, especially through uses of deracialized discourse, participants’ actions were observably shaped by the potential ways in which others could hear “race” and “racism”. Race trouble thus became manifest through racial suggestion, allusion, innuendo and implication. We conclude with a call to social psychologists to study the ways in which meanings of “race” and “racism” are forged and contested in relation to each other