Search

Three studies introduce a novel individual-difference construct to explain majority group members' responses to organizational diversity efforts: lay theories of diversity initiatives. Zero-sum beliefs (ZSBs) presume that efforts to advance diversity come at the expense of majority group members. Win-win beliefs (WWBs) posit that diversity initiatives can benefit all racial groups. Study 1 created and validated measures of ZSBs and WWBs. Study 2 showed that ZSBs and WWBs are distinct from 10 intergroup measures (e.g., social dominance orientation, modern racism) and that each lay theory accounts for unique variance in explaining Whites' reactions to diversity initiatives. Study 3 demonstrated that ZSBs and WWBs predict Whites' reactions to diversity policies of a hypothetical company. These findings suggest that ZSBs and WWBs both help explain majority group members' backlash against and support for organizational diversity initiatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Feelings of group-based relative deprivation (GRD) motivate collective responses to defend the ingroup. As such, there may be status-based asymmetries in the associations GRD has with ideologies that perpetuate inequality—namely, right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO). Study 1 examined this hypothesis using a national sample of adults (N = 41,007) and revealed that the correlations GRD had with RWA and SDO were positive among members of a high-status group but negative among members of low-status groups. Study 2 examined these associations longitudinally (N = 22,083) across eight annual assessments. Although a traditional cross-lagged panel analysis identified status-based asymmetries in the longitudinal associations between our variables of interest, analyses partitioning between-person stability from within-person change found no evidence that GRD leads to differences in RWA or SDO (or vice versa). The theoretical and practical implications of these results are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents a contingency model on the effectiveness of dominance as a route to influence in organizational work teams. In a field study (n = 397 members from 54 work teams), we observed that perceived intra-team competition represents a key context factor that moderates the relationship between dominance displays and influence attainment. Although dominant members attained more influence than non-dominant members, their influence was proportionally greater when team competition was high, rather than low. A follow-up scenario experiment (n = 429 participants) confirmed the proposed causal direction of this interaction effect. Moreover, this study showed that normative evaluations of (non-)dominant behavior drive the findings. Dominance displays were considered more appropriate, normal, and functional (i.e., normative) in teams with high competition, whereas non-dominant behavior was seen as more normative in teams where competition was low. Consequently, non-dominant members also gained influence in this last team situation, reducing the relative influence advantage of dominant members. The results support both the functional view and the contextual value perspective on hierarchy formation in teams, and inform organizations about how they can prevent dominance-based influence processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research examines gender-based helping behavior from a social dominance perspective. We focused on the interplay between the gender of a prospective donor and the gender of the recipient in shaping donation decisions in contexts that either empower recipients or not. In two studies (N = 866), male (but not female) donors chose to donate less often (Study 2) and to give lower amounts (Studies 1–2) to women in need than to men when donations were made in a potentially empowering context – a business context (e.g., donating to a person whose shop burned down), than in a nonempowering context – a domestic context (e.g., donating to a person whose house burned down). Lack of empathy for the female recipient among men partially mediated this gender–donation bias effect (Study 2). These findings suggest that men are less likely to help women in situations that empower women and challenge the existing gender hierarchy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Whites display an asymmetry when detecting discrimination—disparate treatment from high-status groups directed toward low-status groups constitutes discrimination but not the opposite. Whites also believe they experience just as much racial discrimination as Blacks. This latter pattern could be especially true for Whites with higher social dominance orientation (SDO)—preference for intergroup dominance and inequality. Three studies (including one pilot study) investigated whether Whites with higher (vs. lower) SDO perceived examples of institutional and individual instances of racial discrimination as evidence of racism when happening to White (vs. Black) victims. Results revealed partial support for our prediction that the asymmetry in discrimination detection for Whites with higher (vs. lower) SDO would be opposite to the previously identified asymmetry, especially for examples of institutional (vs. individual) discrimination. Implications are discussed in the context of the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests and 2021 Capitol siege. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research has demonstrated that low social dominance orientation (social equality orientation) promotes empathy with disadvantaged group members. In three studies, we tested a model relating preference for egalitarianism to positive attitudes towards immigrants through emotional experiences (pride, guilt, moral anger/ anger, disgust). Studies 1 and 2 showed that social equality orientation was positively related to proimmigrant attitudes through increased pride in helping immigrants, controlling for participants' gender, age, and political orientation. Such a preference for egalitarianism was unrelated to proimmigrant attitudes through guilt for not helping immigrants and moral anger concerning mistreatment of immigrants. By focusing on emotional experience concerning proimmigrant national initiatives (e.g., integrating immigrants into the labor market), Study 3 corroborated the indirect effect of social equality orientation on proimmigrant attitudes through increased pride, controlling for participants' gender, age, political orientation, as well as competitive jungle and dangerous world beliefs. Although much weaker, we also found a positive association between social equality orientation and proimmigrant attitudes through reduced anger, while no significant association through guilt and disgust was found. Results suggest that, relative to guilt, anger, and disgust, pride is the key channel through which preference for egalitarianism is related to positive attitudes towards immigrants. Implications and future directions for research are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although religiosity correlates positively with authoritarianism, the temporal ordering of this relationship is unclear. Because religious teachings often promote authoritarian values, right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) should increase following religious conversion. Yet spiritual beliefs may also promote egalitarianism. As such, social dominance orientation (SDO) might decrease postconversion. We tested these hypotheses using data from a subset of participants who converted to Christianity at some point during a 9-year longitudinal panel study (N = 536). We also examined a separate subsample who deconverted over the same period (N = 696). As hypothesised, RWA was stable before conversion, but increased slightly after becoming religious. Unexpectedly, SDO was stable both pre- and postconversion. Conversely, those who deconverted from Christianity experienced declines in RWA both before and after losing their religion, whereas SDO declined only postdeconversion. These results suggest that religious conversion precedes increases in RWA (but not SDO), and that declines in RWA precede deconversion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Police administrators are looking for concrete pathways to fight the phenomenon of (ethnic) prejudice among members of the police force. Surprisingly, few studies have assessed the effectiveness of existing police ethics training programs on prejudice and social dominance orientation. Therefore, we assessed the impact of a 1-day training called the Holocaust, Police, and Human Rights (HPH) program on the attitudes related to ethnic prejudice and social dominance orientation of 223 members of the Belgian police. Analyses of three-wave panel data indicate that HPH training reduced ethnic prejudice and social dominance orientation. For ethnic prejudice, the reduced effects were maintained after 1 month in the follow-up study. However, the effect of training on prejudice was weaker for police officers who were more often exposed to victims and perpetrators of crime. No lasting effect of HPH training was found for social dominance orientation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Those on the political right engage in greater meat consumption and animal exploitation than their left-wing counterparts. Previous research suggests this is because they view vegetarianism as threatening the nation's dietary customs and economy. Across two studies, I extend this concept of "vegetarianism threat" by showing that it separates into two distinct dimensions of concern: cultural (symbolic) threats and economic (realistic) threats. The resultant multidimensional scale allows a finer grained understanding of the roots of ideology-based threat responses to meat-free movements. Together, results implicate symbolic concerns as the key element of vegetarianism threat contributing to negative attitudes towards meat abstention and its proponents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, we examine the roles of social dominance orientation (SDO) and ecological dominance orientation (EDO) as predictors of climate change risk and threat perceptions and associated pro-environmental policy support. EDO is a novel measure that we devised based on social dominance theory to assess general preferences for an anthropocentric, hierarchical arrangement between humans, non-human animals, and the natural environment. Across two pre-registered studies (N = 715; USA and Germany) our results indicate that SDO and EDO are uniquely associated with decreased support for climate change mitigation policies benefitting humans, non-human animals, and the natural environment. These relationships in turn are partially mediated by decreased climate change risk and threat perceptions. We successfully replicate our findings using a more behavioral measure as dependent variable. Notably, using a more behavioral measure (Study 2), EDO was significantly associated with pro-environmental behavior but not SDO, when threats are accounted for as mediators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Against the backdrop of significant social and political change in the US, dominant groups' perceptions of discrimination against their group have increased. Previous research shows that group threat and legitimizing beliefs augment these perceptions. However, the concurrent role of individuals' attitudes towards hierarchy in perceived discrimination has not been examined. In the present research, we investigate whether social dominance orientation (SDO) and group threat (status and moral image threat) interact to predict perceived discrimination among two dominant groups, White Americans and men. Furthermore, we test whether their perceived discrimination predicts less support for policies benefitting minorities and immigrants, and women, respectively. Across two correlational studies (Studies 1 and 2) and one experiment (Study 3), we found little support for the proposed interaction between SDO and group threat; instead, they were independent predictors of the outcomes. By testing SDO and perceived group threats simultaneously, these studies contribute to the literature by showing that group-based and hierarchy-based concerns play distinct roles in perceived discrimination among dominant groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scholars have long argued that sexism is partly rooted in dominance motives over animals and nature, with women being perceived as more animal-like and more closely connected to nature than men. Yet systematic research investigating these associations is currently lacking. Five studies (N = 2,409) consistently show that stronger beliefs in human supremacy over animals and nature were related to heightened hostile and benevolent sexism. Furthermore, perceiving women as more closely connected to nature than men was particularly associated with higher benevolent sexism, whereas subtle dehumanization of women was uniquely associated with higher hostile sexism. Blatant dehumanization predicted both types of sexism. Studies 3 and 4 highlight the roles of social dominance orientation and benevolent beliefs about nature underpinning these associations, while Study 5 demonstrates the implications for individuals' acceptance of rape myths and policies restricting pregnant women's freedom. Taken together, our findings reveal the psychological connections between gender relations and human–animal relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research has highlighted how ideological factors such as political self-identification, religiosity and conspiracy thinking influence our beliefs about scientific issues such as climate change and vaccination. Across three studies (combined N = 9,022) we expand on this line of inquiry to show for the first time that the ideological attitudes relating to authoritarianism and group-based dominance predict disagreement with the scientific consensus in several scientific domains. We show these effects are almost entirely mediated by varying combinations of ideological (political ideology, religiosity, free-market endorsement, conspiracy thinking) and science-specific (scientific knowledge, trust in scientists) constructs, depending on the scientific issue in question. Importantly, a general distrust of science and scientists emerges as the most consistent mediator across different scientific domains. We find that, consistent with previous research, the ideological roots of rejection of science vary across scientific issues. However, we also show that these roots may share a common origin in ideological attitudes regarding authority and equality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Serious concerns about public distrust of scientific experts and the spread of misinformation are growing in the US and elsewhere. To gauge ideological and psychological variability in attitudes toward science, we conducted an extensive analysis of public opinion data based on a nationally representative survey of U.S. adults (N = 1,500) and a large replication sample (N = 2,119). We estimated the unique effects of partisanship, symbolic and operational forms of political ideology, right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), social dominance orientation (SDO), and general system justification (GSJ), after adjusting for demographic factors. Multiverse analyses revealed that (a) conservatism and SDO were significant predictors of distrust of climate science in > 99.9% of model specifications, with conservatism accounting for 80% of the total variance; (b) conservatism, RWA, religiosity, (male) sex, (low) education, (low) income, and distrust of climate science were significant predictors of skepticism about science in general (vs. faith) in > 99.9% of model specifications; (c) conservatism, RWA, (low) education, and distrust of climate science were significant predictors of trust in ordinary people (over scientific experts) > 99.9% of the time; and (d) GSJ was a significant predictor of trust in scientific experts (over ordinary people) 81% of the time, after adjusting for all other demographic and ideological factors. Implications for the role of science in democratic society are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The cultural dimension of power distance refers to individuals' acceptance of power inequalities in society. Countries characterized by high power distance at the collective level face more domestic extremism. However, research has yet to examine how individual differences in power distance orientation may affect individuals' intentions to engage in radical and violent political action. In this research, we test the hypothesis that stronger endorsement of power distance values makes people more prone to express their intentions to engage in radical and violent political action. To test the hypothesis' generalizability across contexts, we sample from 2 countries characterized by different levels of power distance at the collective level, South Korea (higher power distance) and the United States (lower power distance). Studies 1a and 1b were surveys (N = 1,214) demonstrating an association between power distance orientation and radical political action over and beyond other known predictors of political participation, including political efficacy, perceived justice, emotions of anger and contempt, political orientation, and social dominance orientation. In Studies 2a–2c (N = 430; 2c preregistered), priming a higher (vs. lower) power distance orientation heightened individuals' propensity to express the intentions to engage in radical political action. Theoretical implications of the findings, and future research directions, are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

People deeply value their social bonds with companion animals, yet routinely devalue other animals, considering them mere commodities to satisfy human interests and desires. Despite the inherently social and intergroup nature of these complexities, social psychology is long overdue in integrating human-animal relations in its theoretical frameworks. The present body of work brings together social psychological research advancing our understanding of: 1) the factors shaping our perceptions and thinking about animals as social groups, 2) the complexities involved in valuing (caring) and devaluing (exploiting) animals, and 3) the implications and importance of human-animal relations for human intergroup relations. In this article, we survey the diversity of research paradigms and theoretical frameworks developed within the intergroup relations literature that are relevant, perchance critical, to the study of human-animal relations. Furthermore, we highlight how understanding and rethinking human-animal relations will eventually lead to a more comprehensive understanding of many human intergroup phenomena. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many people in Western societies tolerate the mistreatment of nonhuman animals, despite obvious ethical concerns about the injustice of animal suffering and exploitation. In three studies, we applied system justification theory to examine the ideological basis of human–animal relations. In Studies 1a and 1b, we showed in both a large convenience sample (N = 2,119) and a nationally representative sample in the US (N = 1,500) that economic system justification uniquely explained the relationship between political conservatism and animal welfare attitudes even after adjusting for social dominance orientation. In Study 2, we replicated and extended these findings using more elaborate measures of animal welfare attitudes in the context of an MTurk sample of U.S. respondents (N = 395). Specifically, we found that conservatism was associated with less support for animal welfare and greater endorsement of speciesism (the belief that humans are morally superior to nonhuman animals) and that individual differences in economic system justification mediated these associations. We discuss several ways in which system justification theory may inform interventions designed to promote support for animal welfare in society at large. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the present research, we applied the dual process model of ideology and prejudice to beliefs and behavioral intentions toward animals. In Study 1 (N = 126), we demonstrate in a community sample that right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) predicts support for restricting the distribution of wolves and bears in the wild mediated by perceived threat elicited from the animal outgroups. In contrast, social dominance orientation (SDO) had an indirect effect on the legitimization of meat consumption via endorsement of human supremacy beliefs. In Study 2 (N = 223), we examined the causal direction of the dual process model using an experimental approach. Results show that RWA predicts support for restricting the free movement of a new animal species in the wild only when it is perceived to be threatening for humans. However, SDO predicted perceived legitimacy of meat consumption, regardless of whether the new animal species was characterized as lower or higher in status compared to other animals. Implications of these findings are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Individuals' perceptions of biracials can vary based on the motives of the perceiver. Here, we examine how two factors—perceivers' group-level identification motives and their system-level beliefs about the desirability of hierarchy (i.e., social dominance orientation)—predict the degree to which they attribute a biracial target's successes or failures to that target's White versus minority background. Across three studies examining different contexts, more anti-egalitarian White participants and more highly identified White participants rated a half-White, half-minority target as being shaped more by his minority (vs. White) background when he was disreputable (vs. reputable)—patterns broadly consistent with prior theorizing on the motivations to maintain social stratification and protect ingroup standing, respectively. In direct contrast, however, egalitarian White participants and White participants low on ethnic identification credited a target's outgroup minority background when he was reputable (vs. disreputable), consistent with a desire to promote social equality and forgoing the opportunity to "bask in reflected glory" on behalf of the ingroup. Our results extend extant theorizing by underlining the benefits of jointly considering both group- and system-level motives when analyzing perceptions and attributions of individuals and groups, and by shedding new light on the understudied psychology of social egalitarians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent research demonstrates that intergroup contact effectively reduces prejudice even among prejudice-prone persons. But some assert that evidence regarding the benefits of contact among prejudice-prone individuals is "mixed," particularly for those higher in social dominance orientation (SDO), one of the field's most important individual differences. Problematically, person variables are typically considered in isolation despite being intercorrelated, leaving the question of which unique psychological aspects of prejudice proneness (e.g., authoritarianism, antiegalitarianism, cognitive style) are responsive to intergroup contact unresolved. To address this shortcoming, in a large sample of White Americans (N = 465) we simultaneously examined the contact–attitude association at varying levels of ideological (SDO, right-wing authoritarianism), cognitive style (need for closure), and identity-based (group identification) indicators of prejudice proneness. Examining a broad range of intergroup criterion measures (e.g., racism, support for racial profiling) we reveal that greater contact quality is associated with lower levels of intergroup hostility for those both lower and higher on a variety of indicators of prejudice proneness, simultaneously considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many studies have focused on mediated paths by which social dominance orientation (SDO) and rightwing authoritarianism (RWA) predict prejudice; fewer have identified factors that moderate their effects. We applied social cognitive domain theory to test whether different ways of reasoning about antigay discriminatory acts moderated the association between SDO, RWA, and condoning antigay discrimination. Moral reasoning (e.g., emphasizing fairness, equality) and personal reasoning (e.g., emphasizing individual interests, qualifications) attenuated the association between SDO, RWA, and condoning discriminatory resource denial in general and religious-specific contexts. Conventional reasoning (e.g., emphasizing group norms, rules) magnified the association between SDO, RWA, and condoning resource denial, but only in a religious-specific context. Findings highlight the need to examine moderators of SDO and RWA effects in effort to disrupt discrimination by those most likely to engage in it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current study tested the extent to which intergroup contact reduces social dominance orientation (SDO), producing secondary transfer effects. Participants were first-year undergraduate students randomly assigned to live with either a same-race roommate or a roommate of a different race in university housing. Participants completed a feeling thermometer and a measure of SDO at the beginning and end of the fall semester. Participants in interracial rooms reported lower levels of SDO and more positive attitudes toward secondary groups (i.e., racial/ethnic groups other than their roommates’ group) than participants in same-race rooms at the end of the semester. Those in interracial rooms exhibited a significant change in SDO levels and attitudes across time, whereas those in same-race rooms exhibited no change. Furthermore, SDO fully mediated the effect of intergroup contact on attitudes toward secondary groups. These findings provide causal evidence of secondary transfer effects and indicate SDO as an underlying mechanism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Inspired by the popular Arab protests against oppressive regimes that began in 2010, people around the world protested in sympathy with the Arab peoples. The present research draws on two major theories of intergroup relations to develop an initial integrative model of sympathetic collective action. We incorporate social dominance theory’s (SDT) concept of (rejectionist) legitimizing myths with the solidarity and emotional mediation concept of the social identity model of collective action (SIMCA) to understand motivations for sympathetic collective action among bystanders. Using data from 12 nations (N = 1,480), we tested three models: (a) SIMCA (i.e., solidarity, anger, and efficacy), (b) a social dominance theory model of collective action (i.e., social dominance orientation and ideologies concerning Arab competence), and (c) an integrated model of sympathetic collective action combining both theories. Results find the greatest support for an integrated model of collective action. Discussion focuses on theoretical pluralism and suggestions for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In two studies, the influence of victim sensitivity, defined as individual differences in the extent to which people react emotionally when confronted with injustice to their own disadvantage, on intergroup emotions in potentially exploitative intergroup situations was examined. Using a cross-lagged design embedded in the German reunification context (N = 451), it was found that West Germans high in victim sensitivity felt more anger toward East Germans and angst for their ingroup’s future vitality 2 years later. In a second experimental study (N = 63), the effect of victim sensitivity on intergroup anger and intergroup angst was shown to be dependent upon perceived exploitation by an outgroup and explained unique variance over and beyond ideological variables (social dominance orientation, right-wing authoritarianism, political orientation). Taken together, these results suggest that victim sensitivity is an important variable to consider in potentially exploitative situations, not only on the interpersonal, but also on the intergroup level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In introducing this Special Issue on gangs, we overview the thrust of its papers, demonstrating how they assist in plugging research gaps from the dearth of psychological attention to gangs. The papers therein raise important theoretical considerations of group process effects, social identity, and communication influences in gangs. Also included are empirical examinations of how attitudes to formal organized crime groups may nurture progang views, how social networks bridge gang divides, the dehumanization and social dominance association with gang membership, and how membership longevity associates with gang members’ attitudes to their group. We conclude with theoretical prospects and empirical vistas for future work. For instance, vitality theory may help explain members’ immersion in gangs, discursive strategies could explain how youth are enticed into gangs, and examinations of community and law enforcement attitudes to gangs may provide insight into how oppositional attitudes are fostered on both sides of the gang divide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present research demonstrates that social dominance orientation (SDO) and trust propensity provide a valuable theoretical framework and methodological toolkit with which to both assess the concept of “defiant individualism,” Sánchez-Jankowski’s trait theory of gang membership, and understand social-psychological gang processes. The research samples 95 gang members in London, UK, while looking at the effects of age, contact with the gang, and position in the gang on the presence of SDO and trust propensity. Using path analysis, the research demonstrates gang tenure and rank are strong predictors of high SDO and low trust propensity, independent of time spent in the gang, which also significantly predicts high SDO and low trust propensity. High SDO and low trust propensity in gangs are also positively correlated. Gang members, it seems, exhibit a “defiant individualist” social character and both selection and group socialization processes are accountable. Such, in turn, may help explain intergang relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social dominance orientation (SDO) has been reported to be strongly related to a multitude of intergroup phenomena, but little is known about situational experiences that may influence SDO. Drawing from research on intergroup contact theory, we argue that positive intergroup contact is able to reduce SDO-levels. The results of an intergroup contact intervention study among high school students (Study 1, N = 71) demonstrated that SDO levels were indeed attenuated after the intervention. Furthermore, this intervention effect on SDO was especially pronounced among students reporting a higher quality of contact. A cross-lagged longitudinal survey among adults (Study 2, N = 363) extended these findings by demonstrating that positive intergroup contact is able to decrease SDO over time. Moreover, we did not obtain evidence for the idea that people high in SDO would engage less in intergroup contact. These findings indicate that intergroup contact erodes one of the important socio-ideological bases of generalized prejudice and discrimination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study adopted a group status perspective to examine the relationships between social dominance orientation (SDO), prejudice, and “Vladimir’s choice” tendency. It was hypothesized that for high-status group members (Israeli Jews), high SDO levels will be followed by increases in prejudice and “Vladimir’s choice” tendency, while for the low-status group (Israeli Arabs), a negative relationship should appear between SDO and the intergroup measures. The research sample comprising 100 Israeli Jews and 85 Israeli Arabs completed SDO and prejudice questionnaires, and performed a resource allocation task. As hypothesized, group status moderated the relationship between SDO and group prejudice. Contrary to our expectations, however, both samples exhibited a positive relationship between SDO and negative group prejudice. A positive relationship was also found between SDO and the positive prejudice factor in the Jewish sample, while no significant relationship was found between SDO and the positive prejudice factor in the Arab sample. Only group status correlated with Vladimir’s choice preferences. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This study examines physiological stress responses to the 2008 U.S. presidential election. The week before and after Election Day, participants provided three daily saliva samples, assayed for cortisol (a principal “stress hormone”) and testosterone. Results revealed that, on Election Day, all participants on average and Republicans in particular exhibited stunted cortisol and testosterone rhythms, perhaps reflecting participants’ anticipation. After Election Day, participants’ political affiliation was not a strong predictor of physiological responses. Their social dominance orientation—that is, their tolerance of social inequalities—was predictive of responses. Those higher in social dominance orientation had higher cortisol and testosterone morning values. These changes suggest that individuals higher in social dominance orientation were distressed but ready to fight back. The present findings add to an emerging body of work showing that sociopolitical differences can influence biological systems relevant to health and behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this experiment, group identification is examined as a potential moderator of the documented racial bias in a shoot–no shoot paradigm. Target race (Black or White) was manipulated within-subjects, and (White) participants’ strength of racial ingroup identification was employed as a continuous predictor. Using signal detection analyses, it was found that the criterion to shoot Black targets decreased as an increasing function of racial ingroup identification. This relationship held even after controlling for gender, social dominance orientation, a measure of cultural stereotyping, and the amount of contact with Blacks. Theoretical implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors used multilevel modeling to examine whether peer group ideological beliefs (n = 109 friendship groups) predicted the homophobic and racist attitudes of other individuals within the group (n = 395 college students). Results indicated that the social dominance orientation (SDO), right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), and universal-diverse orientation (UDO) ideological beliefs of peers predicted the prejudiced attitudes of other group members, over and above individuals' own ideological views. Additionally, the strength with which individuals' own ideological beliefs predicted their prejudiced attitudes varied systematically across peer groups. Affiliations with high-RWA peers strengthened the extent to which individuals' own SDO and RWA predicted their prejudiced attitudes. Results suggest the ideological beliefs of peers are relevant to predicting the prejudiced attitudes of the individuals with whom they affiliate. Although specific peer ideologies differentially predicted forms of prejudice, the overall contribution of these peer ideology beliefs to the prediction of individuals' prejudiced attitudes was comparable for both homophobic and racist attitudes. Attention to proximal social networks and the social dynamics within these networks can contribute to better explanations of individual differences in prejudiced attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined weight controllability attributions for obese and non-obese targets who were either racial ingroup or outgroup members, predicting that attributions would be biased in favor of ingroup targets. In Experiment 1, white British participants attributed more controllability to obese than to non-obese targets overall, and this effect was more pronounced for black than for white targets. In Experiment 2, white and black American participants rated targets that were racial ingroup or outgroup members, fit or obese, and male or female. Again, the simple effect of target weight was stronger for racial outgroup than for racial ingroup targets. Consistent with past research on hierarchical category dominance for gender, the effects were stronger for same-gender targets than for opposite-gender targets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two studies examined self-other overlap and intergroup emotions as mediators of the effects of respect for persons on action tendencies towards outgroup members. In contexts of both mild (Study 1) and more severe (Study 2) intergroup conflict, respect for persons predicted action tendencies towards outgroup members: those who value the intrinsic worth of others (high respect for persons) expressed less negative and more positive action tendencies towards outgroup members than did those with low respect for persons. These effects were obtained while controlling for Social Dominance Orientation and Agreeableness (Study 1). Further, the effects of respect for persons on action tendencies were shown to be partially mediated by self-other overlap and intergroup emotions. The findings support previous work in suggesting that respect for persons is an important predictor in intergroup contexts, and they highlight potential mechanisms through which respect might operate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Little is known about the origins of dehumanization or the mechanisms through which dehumanization impacts outgroup prejudice. We address these issues by measuring and manipulating animal-human similarity perceptions in a human intergroup context. As predicted, beliefs that animals and humans are relatively similar were associated with greater immigrant humanization, which in turn predicted more favorable immigrant attitudes (Study 1). Those higher in Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) or lower in Universal Orientation particularly rejected animal-human similarity beliefs, partially explaining their increased tendency to dehumanize and reject immigrants. In Study 2, perceptions of animal-human similarity were experimentally induced through editorials highlighting similarities between humans and other animals or emphasizing the human-animal divide. Emphasizing animals as similar to humans (versus humans as similar to animals, or the human-animal divide) resulted in greater immigrant humanization (even among highly prejudiced people). This humanization process facilitated more re-categorization (i.e., inclusive intergroup representations between immigrants and Canadians) and increased immigrant empathy, both of which predicted less prejudicial attitudes toward immigrants. Implications for research, theory, and interventions for dehumanization and prejudice are considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Need for closure (NFC) refers to the need for firm answers to reduce uncertainty. We propose that because cultural norms are closure providers, when rendering social judgments, individuals with higher NFC would be more likely to conform to the dominant norms. Furthermore, because ingroup identification increases the perceived contrast between ingroup and outgroup cultures and enhances the perceived consensual validity of the dominant cultural norms within a country, high ingroup identifiers with high NFC would adhere to their native cultural norm when managing situations in their own country; however, they would rely more on the dominant cultural norms in a foreign country when deciding how to respond in that country. Two studies provided consistent support to our hypotheses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Humans use facial cues to convey social dominance and submission. Despite the evolutionary importance of this social ability, how the brain recognizes social dominance from the face is unknown. We used event-related brain potentials (ERP) and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRl) to examine the neural mechanisms underlying social dominance perception from facial cues. Participants made gender judgments while viewing aggression-related facial expressions as well as facial postures conveying dominance or submission. ERP evidence indicates that the perception of dominance from aggression-related emotional expressions occurs early in neural processing while the perception of social dominance from facial postures arises later. Brain imaging results show that activity in the fusiform gyrus, superior temporal gyrus and lingual gyrus, is associated with the perception of social dominance from facial postures and the magnitude of neural response in these regions differentiates between perceived dominance and perceived submissiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ïVladimir's choice' refers to the tendency for people to favor the ingroup relative to the outgroup-even when doing so requires that people sacrifice ingroup profits in absolute terms. We investigated correlates of this tendency by asking a sample of White undergraduates to complete an allocation task using a resource allocation matrix. While there was a slight tendency for Vladimir's choice to increase with increasing levels of ethnic identification, this tendency disappeared when other factors were considered. Consistent with realistic group conflict theory and social dominance theory, the tendency to make Vladimir's choice increased with increasing levels of perceived intergroup competition and social dominance orientation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two broad distal causes of prejudice are past history of intergroup contact and general political predispositions. Two studies investigate the extent to which these effects are mediated by emotions directed at the outgroup, as proposed by Intergroup Emotions Theory (Smith, 1993). In both studies, past intergroup contact and Social Dominance Orientation predict prejudice, as measured either by a feeling thermometer or the Modern Racism Scale. Furthermore, for both studies these effects are significantly mediated by intergroup emotions, above and beyond measures of stereotypes (stereotype endorsement in Study 1 and stereotype knowledge in Study 2) that were entered as alternative potential mediators. Stereotype endorsement also plays a significant mediational role in one case. Increased attention to the role of emotions in intergroup relations, including in the mediation of such powerful and well-known effects as those of intergroup contact and political predispositions, appears to be warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research investigated the relation between sexism, general prejudice, and reactions to sexist humor. Eighty-one male participants completed measures of modern sexism, ambivalent sexism, right-wing authoritarianism, and social dominance orientation, and rated the funniness, offensiveness, and likelihood of repeating female-disparaging and male-disparaging jokes. Results revealed that men who were higher in hostile sexism were especially likely to report that they would repeat the female-disparaging jokes, and rated these jokes as funnier than did men who were lower in hostile sexism. In addition, the relation between hostile sexism and the likelihood of repeating these jokes was mediated by their perceived funniness. These effects were not evident for the male-disparaging jokes. Results are discussed in terms of the function of sexist humor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social identity theory typically emphasizes how low status group members resist and challenge imputations of inferiority (Tajfel & Turner, 1979), whereas system justification theory emphasizes the tendency to accept and justify status hierarchies (Jost & Banaji, 1994). On the theoretical assumption that responses to ingroup inferiority would vary according to individual differences in social dominance orientation (SDO; Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, & Malle, 1994), we predicted and found in two studies that low SDO members of low status groups engage in resistance and social competition, as social identity theory would predict, whereas high SDO members follow system justifying patterns of acquiescence and even active bolstering of the status quo. The fact that the studies were conducted in two cultures (USA and Italy) that differ with regard to hierarchical traditions and beliefs about social mobility increases the generalizeability of the results and strengthens the conclusion that SDO predicts acquiescent vs. resistant responses to ingroup inferiority. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined various group identifications among Lebanese Muslims and Christians after the events of September 11 2001 and how these identifications related to social dominance orientation (SDO) and support for violence against the West. We expected stronger identification with less powerful groups to be associated with lower SDO (i.e. greater desires for group equality), and stronger support for terrorist organizations and violent acts against powerful nations. Consistent with these expectations, we found that SDO related negatively to identification with Arabs, and this group identification related positively to support for terrorist organizations and feelings that the September 11 attack was justified. Furthermore, we found that the direct negative effect of SDO on support for terrorism was mediated by Arab identification. Efforts to reduce conflict are discussed in terms of recognizing the anti-dominance elements of Arab identification in Lebanon, and the powerful implications that this subordinate group identification has for continued support of terrorist organizations and violence against the West. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using vocational choice and social dominance theories as organizing frameworks, and employing data from a five-wave longitudinal study of undergraduates, we explored the relationship between generalized anti-egalitarianism, on the one hand, and the choice of hierarchy-enhancing (HE) and hierarchy-attenuating (HA) college majors and future careers on the other hand. Consistent with theoretical expectations, the data showed that students with high levels of anti-egalitarianism were more likely to choose HE college majors and future careers, while students with relatively low levels of generalized anti-egalitarianism were more likely to choose HA college majors and future careers. Congruent students (high antiegalitarianism/HE majors and low anti-egalitarianism/HA majors) enjoyed greater academic success, and greater expectations of academic success than incongruent students (high antiegalitarianism/HA majors and low anti-egalitarianism/HE majors). Finally, we explored three processes possibly responsible for the congruence between anti-egalitarianism and career path: (1) self-selection, (2) institutional socialization, and (3) differential success/differential attrition. The results only showed support for serf-selection mechanisms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Based on models of intergroup competition and social dominance, we examined the impact of perceived economic competition with immigrants on support for empowering and non-empowering forms of assistance for immigrants. In Study 1, a manipulation of perceived economic competition with immigrants caused attenuated support for empowerment but not for non-empowering forms of help. In Study 2, people higher in social dominance orientation were less willing to endorse empowerment for immigrants than were people lower in social dominance orientation, and this relation was mediated by the belief that economic and power gains for immigrants result in economic and power losses for members of host populations. It is suggested that people's desire to maintain a discrepancy in economic and power resources between immigrants and host populations undermines support for empowering forms of help for immigrants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two studies examined the interactive effects of social dominance orientation (SDO), group status, and perceived stability on various manifestations of favoritism for high-status groups: (1) an analysis of survey data from a sample of UCLA students, and (2) an analogous experimental study using a modified version of the minimal-group paradigm. Results of these studies offered general support for the hypothesis that high-SDO members of low-status groups would only favor high-status groups when the system of hierarchy was perceived to be stable (i.e. impervious to change), although findings were somewhat less clear-cut in the experimental study. Implications for social dominance theory and other theories of intergroup behavior are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]