Current Research Projects

Perceived Political Fairness: Factors and Consequences

For many decades, psychologists have been studying the motivation of human behavior. One area of study of motivation is the perception of fairness. Researchers distinguish two main types of fairness: reward/punishment distribution fairness and decision-making process fairness. Process fairness plays an important role in politics. In general, the more fair people perceive political interactions to be, the more positively they view individual politicians and political institutions, the more they approve of decisions made and are willing to implement them. We examine what people rely on when making judgments about the fairness of political decisions, and under what circumstances this occurs. If you are interested in this topic, please write to Olga Gulevich: ogulevich@hse.ru

The Concept of 'Violence' in Social and Political Theory and Factors Determining the Lay Perception of Violence

Social and political philosophy have always operated with the category of violence. In spite of this, violence and violent people have rarely—almost never—been the central subject of these disciplines. In a context where violence is recognised as an essentially contested concept whose criteria for definition are more than vague, it is productive to turn to the factors that determine the everyday (lay) perception of the phenomenon. How, why, and in what cases do people tend to label some actions as violent and some as non-violent? We identify several groups of such factors, including social, political, and psychological. If you are interested in research devoted to this topic or similar subjects, please write to Maria Rodionova: mmrodionova@hse.ru

Affective Political Polarisation and Hate Speech in Social Media
Numerous studies point to the progressive growth of political polarisation in the world, and above all its 'emotional' variety—affective polarisation. We study this phenomenon by analysing the speech behaviour of social network users, primarily the language of hatred (hostility). We focus on key polarising cleavages in values and political orientations, social and political groups as objects of hatred, and the relationship between this phenomenon and political mobilisation. If you are interested in this topic, please write to Andrey Akhremenko: aakhremenko@hse.ru

Perceptions of the 'Ideal' Country
People have different visions of 'ideal' economic (eg, private vs state ownership, the role of the government vs citizens' responsibility for their welfare, etc) and political (eg, centralisation vs decentralisation of political power, adherence vs non-adherence to individual rights and freedoms, etc) systems for their country. We study individual and situational factors that influence attitudes toward different economic and political systems. If you are interested in this topic, please write to Olga Gulevich: ogulevich@hse.ru

Preference for Political Leaders
Political leaders (eg, mayors, governors, presidents) can employ various leadership styles (eg, authoritarian or democratic, task-oriented or relationship-oriented, focused on individual or group needs). We study individual and situational factors that influence attitudes toward politicians with different leadership styles. If you are interested in this topic, please write to Olga Gulevich: ogulevich@hse.ru

'Dangerous Speech' in Mass Media and Social Networks
'Dangerous speech' is an umbrella term that encompasses the diversity of speech practices that incite contradictions between citizens and lead to violence. In the era of social networks, dangerous speech has become commonplace, and the issue of its regulation is regularly discussed in the public space. Should dangerous speech be banned and citizens punished for it? Where is the line between protecting minorities and suppressing dissent? These questions are debated today by political philosophers and lawyers, who are far from reaching a consensus on whether dangerous speech is a legitimate subject of political regulation. Communication researchers today are increasingly focusing on counter-speech as a tool for countering dangerous speech. What are the most productive counter-speech strategies? In what situations does counter-speech help to level out the negative effects of dangerous speech? This project invites students to ask themselves these questions and explore various aspects of the phenomenon of dangerous speech in the Russian public sphere. If you are interested in this topic, please write to Konstantin Zhigadlo (kzhigadlo@hse.ru) and Elif Shipy (ea.shipi@hse.ru)

Political Conformism
When an individual expresses their opinions on economic and political issues, they may be guided by their own beliefs and the opinions of other people. Numerous psychological studies have identified factors influencing compliance with the positions of the authorities (obedience) and the majority (conformity). However, there is limited research on obedience and conformity in the political domain. We study which individuals under what conditions are more likely to agree with the decisions of government authorities and the opinions of the majority of the country's residents on economic and political issues. If you are interested in this topic, please write to Olga Gulevich: ogulevich@hse.ru