Introduction
Several debates are rising in contemporary society, the majority of which are controversial. Societal perceptions and cultures often bring people together in reasoning out the ethical and moral values of human behaviors and attitudes. The variation of cultural norms and personality from one region to the other display the different positions taken by individuals debating on controversial topics. For example, Ciftci and co-authors talk about sexism in the European Journal of social psychology. The writers collectively consider the thoughts of the target audience by highlighting the negative and positive factors of organizational tolerance of sexism. In addition, the 2020 journal exposes the workplace relationships of women and their occupational spaces. Ciftci et al. (2020) examine the role of organizational climate at work, especially among women.
According to the article, women are drawn together after experiencing sexism-oriented abuses. Similarly, Sambaraju (2021) addresses a contemporary topic in the modern day; in his text, the author brings readers together to think about racism. Sambaraju’s journal argues about the population permitted and limited to complain about racism as a global challenge. Reviewing the key ideas, methodological, ethical, and evidence in Sambaraju (2021) and Ciftci et al. (2020) depicts the similarities and differences between the two articles.
Ethical and Methodological Considerations
Research is guided with a set of principles and policies that ensures the achievability of standard writing properties and consideration. The methods applied in data and information collection matter a lot to readers and authors. Secondly, the ethical considerations must be a priority in any documentation published and uploaded online because ethics is the basis of moral support. As such, analyzing the ethical factors in Ciftci et al. (2020) enables readers to match the article to the standard practicums and levels of global writing.
The writers considered the ethical elements of publication because the article protects the rights of research participants. Women are protected in the article; Vachhani & Pullen, (2019) explains that the gender is isolated as a minority group whose interests and human rights are abused at workplaces. Ciftci et al. (2020) represents women as a vulnerable group but protects their rights by warning men in the workspace of women from abusing such people sexually. On the one hand, Chawla (2019) exposes the significance of empowering women while on the other hand, Ciftci et al. (2020) suppresses the viability of empowerment to the gender. The European journal of social psychology; however, challenges the need to empower women if such gender is exposed to sexism experiences at workplaces. Unlike Ciftci and co-writers’ objectives, Triana et al. (2019) commends that urges their audiences on the importance of sexism topics at workplaces. In the research, perceived tolerance among women is an important factor that helps the gender in molding their social relationships.
Unlike in the Ciftci’s article, Sambaraju’s text does not protect the rights of participants. Sambaraju (2021) questions the rights of participants instead of supporting the rights of affected individuals throughout the work. In the article, Sambaraju distances the victims of racism from negotiations linked to the contemporary debate on abuses and discriminations linked to skin color differences. Racism is a critical debate that should be inclusive; perpetrators, victims, and affected families and countries should participate in the debate for the attainment of accurate information regarding the background problem (Van der Merwe & Brinton, 2020). Even though Sambaraju (2021) stresses that social psychology is responsible for the categorization of racism negotiations, the journal fails to protect the rights of research participants. Research that fails to meet the ethical considerations of publications cannot correspond to the collaboration of science and society (Majavu, 2020). As a result, the Ciftci (2020) article seems more scientific than Sambaraju (2021) because it considers the rights of participants. Ethical considerations connect studies to the rising public problems; both articles isolated public issues; however, Sambaraju’s journal did not incorporate the protective rights of research participants.
Secondly, the research design and issues in Ciftci and co-writers and Sambaraju work outlines how the research deals with each of its initial proposals. Therefore, both the journals consider the ethical considerations of informed consent and confidentiality in the documentation of the research objectives and findings. Bettache (2020) stresses the needs for cultural and psychological approaches in sorting discriminative problems in Asia. Similarly, both Ciftci and Sambaraju’s journals considered the methodological parameters of choosing their participants.
The voluntary participation of women and victims of racism in both journals exposes the positive attribution of the researchers on wise selection of methods of research. Choosing working class women displayed unemployed women as the control experiment in Sambaraju’s article while neglecting victims of racism in Ciftci’s text are the domain sample of the experiment. Perpetrators; however, are the control experiment allowed to debate on matters of racism and how Black Africans are discriminated against in India. The methodology used in each article gives participants the anonymity traits; meaning the identities of involved people are not well-known. In contrast, the data of samples (people) are identifiable but their personal information or data are not disclosed to readers or target of the experiment.
Evidence in Ciftci and Co-Researchers Journal
Research papers contain evidence that persuades readers depending on the topic of discussion. Ciftci et al. (2020), for example talks about the role of organizational climate in shaping and molding women’s social relationships at workplaces. According to the study, women “draw together” with other females at workplaces after experiencing the intolerance of sexism in organizational based climates. Further, the article suggests the role of organizational climate in shaping the attitudes and human behaviors in occupation environments. First, it is evident that organizational climate tolerating sexism are associated with more sexual harassment cases than those environments characterized with intolerant sexism traits. Organizations that do not tolerate sexism debates have fewer instances of sexual assault because such environments are categorized under responsible organizational climates (Ciftci et al. 2020). Although organizations tolerating sexism are at lesser positions of interacting with sexual harassment of women, organizational climates that does not tolerate sexism does not guarantee the automatic elimination of sexism in workplace surroundings considering women as employees.
The article explores the advantages of organizational climates tolerating sexism and compares its impacts to women’s social relationships. In the study, such environments promoted the health and wellbeing of women at workplaces than those that did not consider organizational sexism climates. When sexism does not occur in working space, the mental health of women in such organization is boosted with limited cases of sexual abuses and discriminations (Ciftci et al., 2020) In addition, persuasive sexism helps companies adopting the organizational sexism climates to project the probabilities of associating to sexual discriminations among women. Therefore, the differences between sexism-oriented climates and those that do not consider the framework in workplaces elaborates the variance in social relationships among females in workspaces (Ciftci et al., 2020). Perceived sexism has more damaging effects on the personalities and attitudes of affected groups. Women who have been sexually abused at workplaces have negative social relationships with male counterparts at offices. Similarly, women who have enjoyed a cordial relationship with me in an organizational sexism climate have a positive attitude about workplace environments surrounded by men.
Evidence in Sambaraju’s Journal
The history of racism in ancient Asia links India as one of the greatest countries that support racial conflicts. Indians were in the past known as serial racists, especially to Black Africans. Sambaraju’s article challenges his audiences on the perceptions of the country by revisiting the evolution of racism in India. Besides, the journal written by Sambaraju, elaborates the and the country’s interactions with people from different nations and originality. According to Sambaraju (2021) the intergroup relationships, racism, and collective victimization of Black Americans in India occur due the nature of racial prejudice.
In the analysis, the Indian researcher sums up the considerations of irrational categorization as the [primary cause of the spread of racism in the country. Social cognition approaches were the psychological tool and framework used to compare the discriminative grouping of Black Americans in India. Sambaraju, (2021) argues that the process of social categorization merged in India and affected Black Africans most based on its policy of separating individuals on the basis of skin color. The nature of prejudice succeeded in separating Negroes from Indians because the approach of social categorization assumes the form of ingroup favoritism. The outcomes of classifying people on the basis of skin color promotes dislike among Negroes and favors Indians.
The methodological tool used in the evaluation of membership categorization and race analysis shows the contextual relevance of the experiment in the article. The efficacy of the method is dependent on the race categorization in India; color differences remain an identity separating Black Americans from other nationalities. As such, Sambaraju (2021) recommends social action as the key factor of analysis in membership categorization. Indians incorporated their culture in grouping each other to small classes that makes sense; however, the negroes in the nation saw the social action as a discriminative element of isolating the black Africans from the majority.
Culture mobilization is a useful approach that developing countries implement to enhance growth and unity of the people. Van der Merwe & Brinton (2020) support the article idea on culture mobilization since the approach of membership categorization leads to the repositories of common sense. The knowledge on cultural mobilization helps communities in learning the concepts of “Race” and “Sex” Van der Merwe & Brinton (2020) also educates its readers on the significance of race and race; the scholars connect the ideologies of Sambaraju (2020) by stressing that the knowledge of race and sex helps individuals to mark the differences in racial classifications. Race, for example, enables the article readers to master the similarities between Hispanic, White, and Black communities.
Sambaraju’s article has a weakness; the journal generalizes issues of racism without familiarizing its audience on the definition of the terminology. How can readers connect the main points from the article’s counter-arguments? Majavu (2020) responds to the claim through the narrative of “African gangs.” The study exposes Black Africans as criminals in ancient Indian settings. Similarly, Sambaraju (2020) questions the uprightness of oppressing black communities based on their skin tone. The study’s outcome supported the traditional and quantitative approach in the analysis of race in India. The journal recommended its audience not to lean on a single definition to identify the membership categorization. Moreover, criminalizing people based on their skin color came out as an oppressive and depressive element.
Current Debates and Complex Topics in Psychology
As a broad field of study, psychology has several complex issues that human beings experience in their social environments today. However, the comparison of Ciftci et al. (2020) and Sambaraju (2021) exposes just a few of the issues monitored or rising in psychology. First, the debate on the mind-body discussion is among the central questions that are currently rising in the field of study. Researchers are aiming to identify whether the mind is part of the body or whether the body is part of the brain. The debate is controversial but it is common and complex in psychology. Secondly, the complicated issue on holism vs. reductionism forms part of the modern debates developing in psychology. Psychologists seek to answer the belief on human behavior through smaller components or any other approaches that unifies human traits as a whole issue. The issue of identifying psychology as a science is also a modern debate that complicates the analysis of psychological topics.
Conclusion
Social psychology plays a crucial role in the analysis of recent issues affecting the world. Scientific researchers have come up with various approaches to explain the concepts of social psychology through quantitative research. Sambaraju and Ciftci’s journals are some of examples of modern articles that connect readers to contemporary issues in social psychology. Ciftci’s text focuses on gender related issues (sexism) that is a complex issue today; in the piece of writing, the authors highlight the factors that bring or separate women apart in social settings.
Occupational stress lingered by sexual harassment comes out as major weakness to the gender and society at large. The organizational climate that promotes sexism helps working-class women in shaping their social behaviors, while organizations characterized with intolerant climates torments women’s sexuality. In contrast, Sambaraju’s work adopts the debate on the complex issue of race and the categorization of people based on sex. The journal promotes awareness on sex and race through the historical concepts on the bonding of Indians and Black Americans. The existing claims about racism against Negroes in India were based on cultural beliefs and membership categorization using the singlehanded approach of skin tone observation.
References
Bettache, K. (2020). A call to action: The need for a cultural, psychological approach to discrimination on the basis of skin color in Asia.Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(4), 1131-1139. Web.
Chawla, N., Wong, E. M., & Gabriel, A. S. (2019). Expanding the discourse surrounding sexual harassment: The case for considering experienced and observed hostile sexism, benevolent sexism, and gendered incivility. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 12(1), 79-83. Web.
Ciftci, E. E., Barreto, M., Doyle, D. M., van Breen, J., & Darden, S. (2020). Distancing or drawing together: Sexism and organizational tolerance of sexism impact women’s social relationships at work. European Journal of Social Psychology, 50(6), 1157-1172.
Majavu, M. (2020). The ‘African gangs’ narrative: Associating Blackness with criminality and other anti-Black racist tropes in Australia.African and Black Diaspora: An International Journal, 13(1), 27-39. Web.
Sambaraju, R. (2021). “We are the victims of racism”: Victim categories in negotiating claims about racism against Black‐Africans in India.European Journal of Social Psychology, 51(3), 467-484. Web.
Triana, M. D. C., Jayasinghe, M., Pieper, J. R., Delgado, D. M., & Li, M. (2019). Perceived workplace gender discrimination and employee consequences: A meta-analysis and complementary studies considering country context. Journal of management, 45(6), 2419-2447.
Vachhani, S. J., & Pullen, A. (2019). Ethics, politics and feminist organizing: Writing feminist infrapolitics and affective solidarity into everyday sexism. Human Relations, 72(1), 23-47.
Van der Merwe, H., & Brinton Lykes, M. (2020). Racism and Transitional Justice. International Journal of Transitional Justice, 14(3), 415-422.