Psikologi Politik: Konsep Umum dan Penerokaan Terhadap Toleransi Serta Keharmonian Etnik di Sabah, Malaysia

Abstract

Psikologi politik merupakan satu bidang akademik yang agak baharu, yang mana menggunakan gabungan pendekatan daripada bidang psikologi sosial dan sains politik. Tujuan utama bidang psikologi politik adalah untuk memahami bagaimana pemikiran dan tingkah laku individu mempengaruhi situasi politik. Kajian ini dijalankan menggunakan kaedah kajian kepustakaan untuk memperoleh maklumat berkenaan konsep psikologi politik secara lebih mendalam dengan merujuk sumber-sumber literatur melalui penelitan artikel dalam jurnal, buku dan laman web rasmi pihak-pihak yang berkaitan dengan konsep psikologi politik. Di samping itu, tujuan utama kajian ini adalah untuk menghuraikan secara ringkas bidang psikologi politik yang merangkumi pengenalan terhadap bidang ini, personaliti di dalam psikologi politik, dan kognisi dan identiti sosial di dalam psikologi politik. Kajian ini turut membincangkan topik mengenai toleransi dan keharmonian etnik di Sabah berserta cadangan haluan penyelidikan yang boleh dijalankan berdasarkan sudut psikologi politik. Kajian ini tidak bertujuan untuk menjadi panduan dan rujukan yang komprehensif mengenai bidang psikologi politik lantaran pengkhususan bidang ini yang agak luas. Kajian ini boleh memberi pemahaman umum terhadap psikologi politik, serta menyediakan landasan kajian toleransi dan keharmonian etnik di negeri Sabah, Malaysia.Kata kunci: Psikologi politik, toleransi, keharmonian etnik, etniksiti, Sabah.AbstractPolitical psychology is a relatively new academic field that uses a combination of approaches from social psychology and political science. The main goal of political psychology is to understand how individual thoughts and behaviors affect political situations. This study was conducted using the library research method. To obtain information on political psychology in more depth is by referring to literature sources through the analysis of articles in journals, books, and official websites of parties related to the concept of political psychology. In addition, the primary purpose of this study is to briefly describe the field of political psychology, which includes an introduction to this field, personality in political psychology, and cognition and social identity in political psychology. This study also discussed the topic of tolerance and ethnic harmony in Sabah. It proposed research directions that can be conducted based on political psychology. This study is not intended to be a comprehensive guide and reference on the field of political psychology due to the relatively broad specialization of this field. This study aims to provide a general understanding of political psychology and then offer a platform for analyzing tolerance and ethnic harmony in Sabah, Malaysia.Keywords: Political psychology, tolerance, ethnic harmony, ethnicity, Sabah.RujukanBakar, A. A. (2012). Psikologi industri dan pengurusan sumber manusia. Penerbit UMT.Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice Hall.Bashori, K. (2018). Pendidikan politik di era disrupsi. Sukma: Jurnal Pendidikan, 2(2), 287-310.Birt, R. (1993). Personality and foreign policy: The case of Stalin. Political Psychology, 15, 607-626.Bobo, L. (1983). Whites’ opposition to busing: symbolic racism or realistic group conflict? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 1196-1210.Brewer, M., & Pierce, K. (2005). Social identity complexity and outgroup tolerance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 428-437. doi:10.1177/0146167204271710Chua, B. S., Shamsul Amri Baharuddin, Rosnah Ismail, Ferlis Bullare @ Bahari, Jasmine Adela Mutang, Lailawati Madian, & Asong Joseph. (2015). Stereotaip, prejudis dan diskriminasi antara kumpulan etnik di Sabah: Konsep, pembentukan instrumen dan pengesahan awal instrumen. Malaysia; Universiti Malaysia Sabah.Costa, P. T., Jr., Terracciano, A., & McCrae, R. R. (2001). Gender differences in personality traits across cultures: Robust and surprising findings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 322-331.Cottam, M. L., Mastors, E., Preston, T., & Dietz, B. (2016). Introduction to political psychology (3rd ed.). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.Crisp, R. J., & Turner, R. N. (2011). Cognitive adaptation to the experience of social and cultural diversity. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 242-266. doi:10.1037/a0021840Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. (2007). Through the labyrinth: The truth about how women become leaders. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School PressEko Prayinto, Othman, Z., Damit, S. A., & Gulasan, A. A. (2018). Sentimen Primodial Dan Kesedaran Politik Dalam Pembangunan Politik Sabah: Penelitian Terhadap Pru-14: Primordial Sentiment And Political Awareness In Sabah Political Development: A Research In The Ge-14. Jurnal Kinabalu, 77-77.Epstein, S., & O'Brien, E. J. (1985). The person-situation debate in historical and current perspective. Psychological bulletin, 98(3), 513–537.Ewen, R. (1998). An introduction to theories of personality (5th ed.). Mah- wah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Forst, R. (2012). Toleration. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Summer 2012 ed.). Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2012/entries/toleration/Freud, S. (1932). Letter to Albert Einstein, September 1932. (Reprinted in Great political thinkers: Plato to the present, pp. 804-810, by W. Eben- stein, Ed., 1951, New York: Rinehart)Freud, S. (1950). Beyond the pleasure principle. New York: Liveright.Freud, S. (1962). Civilization and its discontents. New York: Norton.Gallagher, M. E., & Allen, S. H. (2014). Presidential personality: Not just a nuisance. Political Psychology, 10, 1-21.George, A. L., & George, J. L. (1998). Presidential personality and performance. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Greenstein, F. I. (1969). Personality and politics: Problems of evidence, inference, and conceptualization. Chicago, IL: Markham.Hairol Anuar. (2010). Pengajian Malaysia: Kenegaraan dan Patriotisme (Edisi Kedua). Bandar Seri Putra: PusatPenyelidikandan Pembangunan Akademik KUIS.Haslam, N. (2006). Dehumanization: An integrative review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10,252-264. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_4Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.Hermann, M. G., Preston, T., & Young, M. (1996, April 16-20). Who leads can matter in foreign policymaking: A framework for leadership analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, San Diego.Horton, J. (1996). Toleration as a virtue. In D. Heyd (Ed.), Toleration: An elusive virtue (pp. 28-43). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Ilias Abdullah. (2021). Perpaduan dan krisis politik Melayu: satu analisis. Journal of Administrative Science. 18(1), 323-333.Jali, M. F. M., Besar, J. A., Lyndon, N., & Zain, M. F. M. (2014). ‘Realignment’pengundi Cina dalam PRU ke-13, 2013 (Malaysia’s GE-13: The'realignment'of Chinese voters). Geografia, 10(4).Jamil, N., & Che Mat, S. H. (2014). Realiti kemiskinan: Satu kajian teoritikal. Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, 48(1), 167-177.Johar, S. S., Panatik, S. A., & Ibrahim, R. Z. A. R. (2021). Transformasi Ketahanan Kecerdasan Emosi dalam Psikologi dan Tingkah Laku Belia. Human Sustainability Procedia, 1(2), 57-66.Jones, E. E., & Davis, K. E. (1965). From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perceptions. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 220-266). New York: Academic Press.Jones, E. E., & Davis, K. E. (1965). From acts to dispositions: The attribution process in person perceptions. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 220-266). New York: Academic PressJost, J., & Sidanius, J. (2004). Political psychology. New York: Psychology Press.Kelley, H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In D. Levin (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (Vol. 5, pp. 192-240). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.King, P. (1976). Toleration. London, England: Allen & Unwin.Keling, M. F., Mohamed, A. S. P., & Suhib, M. S. (2016). Dasar Pertahanan Negara Malaysia: Adakah ianya kukuh?. Mimbar Pendidikan, 1(1).Laman Web Rasmi Kerajaan Negeri Sabah. (2022). Rakyat & Sejarah. Diakases dari https://www.sabah.gov.my/cms/?q=ms/content/rakyat-sejarah pada 1 Mac 2022.Louis, W. R., Duck, J. M., Terry, D. J., Schuller, R. A., & Lalonde, R. N. (2007). Why do citizens want to keep refugees out? Threats, fairness and hostile norms in the treatment of asylum seekers. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 53-73. doi:10.1002/ejsp.329Mansor Mohd Noor. (2010). “Hubungan Melayu dan Cina di Malaysia masa kini”: Buta dengan perubahan realiti sosial negara. Demokrasi. 9(2), 185-207.Marsella, A. J., Dubanoski, J., Hamada, W. C., & Morse, H. (2000). The measurement of personality across cultures: Historical, conceptual, and methodological issues and considerations. American Behavioral Scientist, 44, 41-62.McClelland, D. C. (1975). Power: The inner experience. New York: Irvington.McClelland, D. C. (1985). How motives, skills, and values determine what people do. American Psychologist, 40, 812-825.McClelland, D. C., & Boyatzis, R. E. (1982). Leadership, motive pattern and long-term success in management. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 737-743.McCrae, R., & Costa, P. T. (1997). Conceptions and correlates of openness to experiences. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Mohd Azlin Zainury. (2019, November 11). Perselisihan kaum, agama: Ahli politik dan media massa jadi punca? Sinar Harian. https://www.sinarharian.com.my/article/56621/BERITA/Nasional/Perselisihan-kaum-agama-Ahlipolitik-dan-media-sosial-jadi-puncaMohd Tamring, B. A., & Hj. Mahali, S. N. (2020). Hubungan Kaum di Sabah: Suatu Pemerhatian Awal. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), 5(10), 95 - 104. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v5i10.498Mohd Tamring, B. A., & Hj. Mahali, S. N. (2020). Toleransi Penduduk Bumiputera Terhadap Kaum Cina di Sabah: Kajian Kes dalam kalangan Pelajar Sekolah Menengah di Kota Kinabalu, Sabah. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), 5(12), 230 - 240. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v5i12.598Monroe, K. R. (2002). Political psychology. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erl- baum AMummendey, A., & Wenzel, M. (1999). Social discrimination and tolerance in intergroup relations: Reactions to intergroup difference. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 158174. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0302_4Olson, B. D., & Evans, D. L. (1999). The role of the big five personality dimensions in the direction and affective consequences of everyday social comparisons. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1498-1508.Pervin, L. A., & John, O. (1997). Personality: Theory and research (7th ed.). New York: John Wiley and Sons.Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process, In L.Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 174-221). New York: Academic Press.Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Sniderman, P., Piazza, T., & Harvey, H. (1998). Prejudice and politics: An intellectual biography of a research project. In J. Hurwitz & M. Peffley (Eds.), Perception and prejudice: Race and politics in the United States. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Sullivan, J. L., & Transue, J. E. (1999). The psychological underpinnings of democracy: A selective review of research on political tolerance, interpersonal trust, and social capital. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 625-650. doi:10.1146/annurev. psych.50.1.625Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty heuristics and biases (pp. 3-20). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Verkuyten, M., & Yogeeswaran, K. (2016). The Social Psychology of Intergroup Toleration. Personality And Social Psychology Review, 21(1), 72-96. doi: 10.1177/1088868316640974Volkan, V. (1980). Narcissistic personality organization and reparative leadership. International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 30, 131-152.Weiner, B. (1986). An attribution theory of motivation and emotion. New York: Springer-Verlag.White, R. K. (1977). Misperception in the Arab-Israeli conflict. Journal of Social Issues, 33, 190-221.Winter, D. G. (1973). The power motive. New York: Free Press.Winter, D. G. (1987). Leader appeal, leader performance, and the motive profiles of leaders and followers: A study of American presidents and elections. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 196-202.Winter, D. G., & Carlson, L. A. (1988). Using motive scores in the psychobiographical study of an individual: The case of Richard Nixon. Journal of Personality, 56, 75-103.Winter, D. G., & Stewart, A. J. (1977). Content analysis as a technique for assessing political leaders. In M. G. Hermann (Ed.), A psychological examination of political leaders (pp. 21-61). New York: Free Press.Winter, D. G., Hermann, M. G., Weintraub, W., & Walker, S. G. (1991). The personalities of Bush and Gorbachev measured at a distance: Procedures, portraits, and policy. Political Psychology, 12, 215-245.Wong, C. H. (2021, May 21). Radikalisme dan politik perkauman. Sinar Harian. https://www.sinarharian.com.my/article/139633/KHAS/Pendapat/Radikalisme-dan-politikperkauma