What could be? Depends on who you ask: Using latent profile analysis and natural language processing to identify the different types and content of utopian visions.

Journal: The British journal of social psychology
PMID: 39898497

Abstract

When people think of a utopian future, what do they imagine? We examined (a) whether people's self-generated utopias differ by how much they criticize, seek to change or escape from an undesirable present; and (b) whether these distinct types of utopian thinking predict system-critical attitudes and intentions to change the status quo. Participants (N = 509) wrote about a future where a social issue they supported was resolved (e.g. economic inequality and climate change). Latent profile analysis revealed a subgroup of change-oriented utopian thinkers with lower system satisfaction and higher action intentions than the other two subgroups. Unexpectedly, the remaining profiles imagined ominous (dystopian thinkers) or 'neutral' (ambivalent future thinkers) futures and expressed mixed social change support. Computerized linguistic analyses further revealed that dystopian thinkers used more hopelessness-related language than change-oriented utopian thinkers. Ambivalent future thinkers were as 'hopeless' as dystopian thinkers but, like change-oriented utopian thinkers, used more fairness-related language. Thus, change-oriented utopian thinkers distinctly imagined a fairer-and possible-future. These results illustrate heterogeneity in how people imagine the future of their societies on specific issues. Critically, the features of these visions predict system-critical attitudes and a willingness to agitate for change.

Authors

  • Morgana Lizzio-Wilson
    Department of Psychology, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
  • Emma F Thomas
    College of Education, Psychology, and Social Work, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
  • Michael Wenzel
    College of Education, Psychology, and Social Work, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
  • Emily Haines
    College of Education, Psychology, and Social Work, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
  • Jesse Stevens
    College of Education, Psychology, and Social Work, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
  • Daniel Fighera
    College of Education, Psychology, and Social Work, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
  • Patrick Williams
    College of Education, Psychology, and Social Work, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
  • Samuel Arthurson
    College of Education, Psychology, and Social Work, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
  • Danny Osborne
    School of Psychology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
  • Linda J Skitka
    Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

Keywords

External Resources

Popular Topics
Recent Journals