Search

Political orientation profoundly influences individual and social decisions. Yet adequate and culturally adaptable tools to quantify it are missing. In personality research, it is common to use questionnaires to capture the multifaceted nature of a construct. Thus, surprisingly, most studies assess political orientation using single‐item scales that fail to account for cultural contexts beyond two‐party systems. Using a bottom‐up approach in which the core content of political orientation was defined by a German sample (N = 117), the current preregistered study developed a contemporary German questionnaire of political orientation (CGPOQ). The CGPOQ consists of 20 items that together form three main factors: "Tradition and National Security," Gender and Sexuality," and "Global Thinking." The factor structure that was determined by exploratory factor analysis (N = 1,089) was validated by confirmatory factor analysis in an independent sample (N = 303). Good fit was demonstrated by comparing the CGPOQ with several convergent (self‐identification, older conservatism questionnaire, voting intention, social dominance orientation, right‐wing authoritarianism) and divergent (religiosity, empathy) measures. The results indicate that the CGPOQ is a valid and reliable instrument for measuring political orientation in a German population. Furthermore, it challenges the assumption that political orientation relies on the same two dimensions across cultures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research in political psychology largely ignores early childhood. This is likely due to the assumption that young children lack the cognitive capacity and social understanding needed for political thought. Challenging this assumption, we argue that research with young children is both possible and important for political psychologists. We focus on the topic of political ideology to demonstrate our argument. We review recent evidence revealing that social cognition in early childhood—and even infancy—is already oriented toward group living in ways that set the foundation of political thought. Young children notice key dimensions of group living (e.g., group boundaries, hierarchies, norms) and use them to guide their reasoning and behavior. Beyond these basic proto‐political sensitivities, young children also display proto‐political attitudes: valenced and/or prescriptive cognitions about dimensions of group living that have political significance (e.g., disliking nonconforming group members, believing that hierarchy between groups is wrong). Even more reminiscent of mainstream political psychology, young children's proto‐political sensitivities and attitudes exhibit systematic individual differences that can roughly be mapped onto three ideological orientations common among adults: authoritarianism, social dominance, and hawkish ideology. We discuss ways in which research with young children is critical for a complete understanding of adult political psychology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In three surveys of adults in five nations, we investigated how shared beliefs about the political system motivate individuals' political engagement. Specifically, we tested whether individuals' beliefs that the political context is fair, noncorrupt, and their belief that they could influence politics motivates political engagement to a higher extent for higher‐ compared to lower‐status group members. In a novel use of social dominance theory, we theoretically conceived of these political beliefs as legitimizing ideologies, so that we predicted that people with higher social dominance orientation endorse these beliefs, which in turn enhance the motivation to engage in politics to support current social hierarchical systems. Moreover, we expected that these relationships would be stronger for higher‐ compared to lower‐status groups. These hypotheses were tested considering different levels of group status: wealth status within a country (Study 1), political‐regional differences within a country (Study 2), and international status (i.e., between countries; Study 3), and they were largely supported. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Psychology has begun contributing to social theory by providing empirical measures of actually existing cosmopolitanism that complements more purely theoretical conceptions of the construct common in philosophy and sociology. Drawing from two waves of research on representative adult samples from 19 countries (N = 8740), metric invariance was found for the three factors of cosmopolitan orientation (COS): cultural openness (CO), global prosociality (GP), and respect for cultural diversity (RCD). In terms of etiology, among Wave 1 measures, the personality factor of agreeableness was the best predictor of the cosmopolitan factors of GP and RCD at Wave 2, whereas openness of personality best predicted CO. Wave 1 measures of education, political liberalism, and self‐reported social status independently also explained a small amount of variance in COS. Functionally, COS was shown to predict less prejudice against immigrants, and more support for global civil society, even after controlling for social dominance orientation. All three COS factors independently predicted better attitudes towards immigrants. GP was the best predictor of trust in the United Nations, whereas RCD was the best predictor of support for environmental protection. The three‐factor model of COS appears well‐calibrated for assessing actually existing cosmopolitanism across cultures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Even though economic globalization and foreign trade are major topics in the political discourse of most societies and negative attitudes toward international trade are prevalent, there is a lack of research investigating the ideological roots of protectionist preferences from a psychological perspective. In the present research, we examined the implications of right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) for trade attitudes. Using data from two nationally representative samples from the United States (Study 1) and Germany (Study 2), we found that RWA predicted protectionist attitudes above and beyond economic self‐interest. Furthermore, we found that the relationship between RWA and opposition to international trade was moderated by political involvement. The association of SDO with protectionist attitudes was inconsistent across the two studies and was not moderated by political involvement. Taken together, these results emphasize the importance of basic ideological orientations and the psychological dispositions they reflect in explaining public attitudes toward international trade. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite a vast literature documenting motivations for collective action, the role of sociopolitical ideologies, including right‐wing ideologies, in predicting collective action is underresearched. Literature on right‐wing ideological beliefs suggests that those higher in right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA) or social dominance orientation (SDO) hold specific attitudes or endorse specific policies, in part, because of factors such as perceived fear‐based threat or empathy. In the present research, structural equation modeling (SEM) was run on pooled data from a diverse Canadian university sample and two American adult samples (total N = 1,469). Participants completed measures of RWA, SDO, fear‐based threat, empathy, and domain‐specific collective action. Results showed that RWA and SDO both related positively to collective action targeting societal moral breakdown but negatively to collective action aimed at equalizing race relations or fighting climate change. Whereas the indirect effects of right‐wing ideologies via fear‐based threat or empathy were significant in all four domains for SDO, the indirect effect of RWA was only significant in the climate change domain. Implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Animal models of conflict behavior predict that an organism's behavior in a conflict situation is influenced by physical characteristics related to abilities to impose costs on adversaries. Stronger and larger organisms should be more motivated to seek larger shares of resources and higher places in hierarchies. Previous studies of human males have suggested that measures of upper‐body strength are associated with measures of support for inequality including Social Dominance Orientation (SDO), a measure of individual differences in support for group‐based hierarchies. However, other studies have failed to replicate this association. In this article, we reexamine the link between upper‐body strength and support for inequality using 12 different samples from multiple countries in which relevant measures were available. These samples include student and locally representative samples with direct measures of physical strength and nationally representative samples with self‐reported measures related to muscularity. While the predicted correlation does not replicate for every single available measure of support for inequality, the overall data pattern strongly suggests that for males, but not females, upper‐body strength correlates positively with support for inequality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We review psychological research on global human identification and citizenship, Thomas Paine's belief that "The world is my country, and all mankind are my brethren." In turn, we review the theoretical foundations that guided our work, research with measures that preceded our own, and our own work with our correlated scales. We review its foundations, its effects upon attitudes and behaviors, and how it might be enlarged. Global human identification and citizenship is related negatively to ethnocentrism, authoritarianism, the social dominance orientation, and self‐centeredness, but positively to dispositional empathy and the values of universalism, care, and justice. It is expressed in attitudes and behaviors that support human rights and work to reduce global suffering and inequalities. It is associated with greater global knowledge and with efforts to acquire that knowledge. Childrearing that emphasizes cross‐cultural exposure and awareness of others' suffering may promote global human identification and citizenship, as does education that encourages global mindedness. Environments that support global human identification also induce it, as does envisioning it as a moral ideal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Existing research highlights the roles of group identities and concerns about mass migration in explaining attitudes towards the European Union (EU). However, studies have been largely silent on whether EU attitudes are also shaped by people's attitudes towards the principles and practices of supranational governance. This research provides a first test of the nature and role of supranational attitudes. We introduce a new measure of supranationalism and, in two studies using samples drawn from the British population, test the psychometric properties of the supranationalism scale. We then identify the socioideological correlates (right‐wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation) of supranationalism, along with its effects in predicting EU attitudes and post‐Brexit preferences. Our core finding is that supranationalism predicts attitudes towards the EU over and above established factors such as national identity and immigrant threat. Our study thus shows the existence of supranational attitudes among individuals and the relevance of such attitudes to people's opinions about international organizations like the EU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We explored how political beliefs and attitudes predict support for anti‐Muslim policies and extremist behavior in the United States following the 2015 Paris terrorist attacks. A large sample completed measures of authoritarianism, social dominance orientation (SDO), generalized prejudice, identification with all humanity (IWAH), perceptions of Muslim threat, and support for anti‐Muslim policies and behaviors. These measures accounted for 73% of the variance in moderate anti‐Muslim policies and 55% of the variance in extreme anti‐Muslim policies. Authoritarianism and SDO directly and indirectly predicted support for anti‐Muslim policies, with their effects partially mediated by generalized prejudice, IWAH, and perceptions of Muslims as threatening. Threat both mediated and moderated the relationship between authoritarianism and anti‐Muslim policies. A negative interaction between authoritarianism and perceptions of Muslims as threatening predicted moderate anti‐Muslim policies, but a positive interaction predicted extreme anti‐Muslim policies. A tentative explanation is offered. Perceptions of Muslim threat was consistently a powerful predictor of anti‐Muslim policies and willingness to engage in extremist behaviors targeting Muslims. Programs to combat anti‐Muslim prejudice should consider the role of threat‐related stereotypes in expressions of anti‐Muslim prejudice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent research finds that political candidates and leaders with dominant, masculine physical features are more preferred under conditions of conflict than of cooperation. Importantly, however, methodological limitations of past research have hindered the identification of whether this effect reflects that voters intuitively view (1) dominant leaders as more competent in solving problems of conflict, (2) nondominant leaders as more competent in solving problems of cooperation, or (3) both. In this article, we utilize recent advances in evolutionary psychology to form precise predictions on the nature of the underlying psychology and employ an unprecedented array of data types-including highly controlled experiments, natural experiments, and behavioral measures-to investigate the validity of these predictions. Using large approximately nationally representative surveys of 2,009 Poles and Ukrainians fielded during the Crimea crisis in 2014, we find that preferences for leader dominance are exclusively driven by the intuition that dominant leaders are better able to facilitate aggressive responses during social conflict and that these preferences are regulated by contextual conditions and individual predispositions related to such responses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2011, the killing of a Black man by a police officer triggered violent riots across England. In a context where ethnic minorities are rarely openly blamed, we examined the lens through which the events were interpreted in the official discourses of the British Prime Minister. A thematic content analysis (Study 1) revealed that, without explicitly blaming ethnic minorities, the discourses built on antagonistic normative references opposing a virtuous majority to threatening minorities. Then, based on online survey data of self-declared Londoners (N = 223) during the riots, we analyzed (Study 2) how agreement with the discourses related to individuals' ethnocentrism and their understanding of the causes underlying the events. Results of regression analyses showed how agreement with the discourses related to blaming ethnic diversity for the riots and to higher ethnocentrism, especially among individuals least likely to discriminate against minorities (i.e., low in social dominance orientation). Agreement with the discourses was also linked to reduced blame of authorities. To conclude, we discuss the mobilization potential of political discourses on ingroup virtue and outgroup threat. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study extends previous research on the influence of social dominance orientation (SDO) in international affairs by investigating the role of sociocognitive processes such as social identity complexity (SIC) and intergroup dehumanization in explaining the relationship between SDO and support for Arabs' autonomy. An Italian heterogeneous sample ( N = 123), in terms of gender, age, political orientation, religiosity, and income level, was considered. We expected that those low on SDO would be more likely to support Arabs' autonomy, would have higher SIC, and would be less likely to dehumanize Arabs. We also expected that SIC and dehumanization would sequentially mediate the relationship between SDO and support for Arabs' autonomy. Results revealed that Italians low on SDO have higher SIC (i.e., a more inclusive social identity) which endorses lower dehumanization of Arabs. This in turn explained the influence of SDO on support for Arabs' autonomy. These findings integrate the literature about SDO and SIC and enhance the understanding of the sociocognitive processes underlying people's support for international egalitarian movements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Societies involved in intractable conflicts form a conflict-supporting master narrative that provides justification and explanation of the conflict as a whole as well as narratives about its specific events and relevant persons. Both types of narratives fulfill important functions in satisfying the basic sociopsychological needs of the individuals and the collectives involved, as well as in maintaining a positive image of the society in the international community. In order to fill these needs, the narratives tend to be selective, biased, and simplistic. Moreover, because these narratives are so functional, societies go to extraordinary lengths to maintain their dominance among their own people and internationally. The present article analyzes the specific case of the Israeli-Jewish narrative of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with regard to the methods that are used in the narrative's construction and the ways through which formal authorities strive to preserve its dominance in Israel and in the international community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Decades of scholarship have identified several determinants of political intolerance, including authoritarianism and normative threat. Previous attempts in the literature to associate other individual difference variables (i.e., social dominance orientation [ SDO]) and situational variables (i.e., out-groups' gains in power and status) have been unsuccessful. Using a dual-process motivational ( DPM) model framework, in Study 1 we found that SDO predicted political intolerance of groups with hierarchy-attenuating political objectives. This relationship was consistent over and above other well-known predictors of political intolerance, including right-wing authoritarianism ( RWA). RWA predicted intolerance of groups with both hierarchy-attenuating and cohesion-reducing objectives. In Study 2, we manipulated whether an immigrant-rights group was described as presenting a normative threat or as gaining power and status. Consistent with extant findings, RWA moderated the effect of normative threat on political intolerance. More interestingly, SDO moderated the effect of gains in power and status on political intolerance. The implications of these findings are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We argue that conflict over immigration largely concerns who bears the burden of cultural transaction costs, which we define as the costs associated with overcoming cultural barriers (e.g., language) to social exchange. Our framework suggests that the ability of native-born citizens to push cultural transaction costs onto immigrant out-groups serves as an important expression of social dominance. In two novel studies, we demonstrate that social dominance motives condition emotional responses to encountering cultural transaction costs, shape engagement in cultural accommodation behavior toward immigrants, and affect immigration attitudes and policy preferences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I study experimentally a single-shot trust game where players have the opportunity to choose an avatar-a computer-generated face-to represent them. These avatars vary on several dimensions-trustworthiness, dominance, and threat-identified by previous work as influencing perceptions of those who view the faces ( Todorov, Said, Engell, & Oosterhof, 2008). I take this previous work and ask whether subjects choose faces that are ex ante more trustworthy, whether selected avatars have an influence on strategy choices, and whether individuals who evaluate faces as more trustworthy are also more likely to trust others. Results indicate affirmative answers to all three questions. Additional experimental sessions used randomly assigned avatars. This design allows me to compare behavior when everyone knows avatars are self-selected versus when everyone knows they are randomly assigned. Random assignment eliminated all three effects observed when subjects chose their avatars. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A theory of the historical anchoring and mobilization of political attitudes is proposed, arguing that culture-specific symbols, configured by historical charters, are an important resource in defining nationhood and legitimizing public opinion in a way that makes some political attitudes difficult to change. Five studies in New Zealand and Taiwan using diverse methods converged to show that historical events with 'charter status' have an additive effect in explaining variance in political attitudes regarding biculturalism in New Zealand and independence in Taiwan even after controlling for the effects of Social Dominance Orientation, Right-Wing Authoritarianism, relevant social identities, and collective guilt. Field and lab experiments showed that the impact of historical symbols did not depend on the mobilization of social identity (e.g., increasing mean scores and indirect effects), but the historical anchoring of political attitudes in representations was resistant to change. Manipulations of the salience of historical events changed levels of social identification, but did not change mean levels of support for New Zealand biculturalism or Taiwanese independence. Even an intense and immersive pretest/posttest design taking high school students on a national museum tour failed to change attitudes towards biculturalism in New Zealand. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is commonly accepted that social dominance orientation (SDO) and right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) are potent unique predictors of a variety of prejudice and prejudice-related constructs. However, contrary to some predictions, there has been little evidence that these constructs interact to produce this outcome-they appear to be additive but not interactive in their prediction of prejudice. We extend the interaction hypothesis to consideration of another broadly relevant construct-political ideology. Drawing from 14 independent New Zealand-based samples, we show, through meta-analysis and multilevel random coefficient modelling, that SDO and RWA additively and interactively predict levels of political conservatism operationalised in a variety of ways. Specifically, both constructs are associated with increasing political conservatism, and the lowest levels of conservatism (or highest levels of political liberalism) are found in those lowest in both SDO and RWA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

According to social dominance theory, intergroup dynamics are strongly influenced by the social positions which individuals hold in society. Several studies suggest that holding a position of power can, sometimes automatically, generate negative attitudes and hostile behaviors toward subordinate social groups. However, at present, the studies carried out on these effects of power have not taken into account the influence of the normative context. Based on the distinction made by Sidanius and Pratto between 'hierarchy-enhancing' (HE) vs. 'hierarchy-attenuating' (HA) environments, this study examines if the effects of power on legitimizing cognitions vary as a function of the normative environment. A laboratory study and a study conducted in a natural environment confirm our hypothesis that individuals holding a powerful or dominant social role in a HE setting differ significantly from individuals holding an equally powerful role in a HA setting. The effects of power observed in past research probably resulted from studying power in hierarchy-enhancing environments, but not in hierarchy-attenuating ones. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We investigate macrocontextual antecedents of national levels of Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). The majority of previous research, in contrast, has tended to focus on individual-level correlates of SDO. We extend research on Social Dominance Theory by modelling national-level differences in institutional discrimination, macroeconomic development, and value ideologies as broad situational factors affecting SDO mean levels in previous studies. Our hypotheses were tested in a three-level meta-analysis of aggregate data from 50,971 individuals in 95 samples from 27 different societies. Strong effects for hierarchy-attenuating legitimizing ideologies and gender empowerment were found. Aggregate discrimination against arbitrary-set groups was less consistently linked to SDO, suggesting that these hierarchies are context-specific. Using mixed-effects three-level modelling, the patterns can be generalized to new contexts and suggest a particular institutional and social climate that fosters high SDO. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Three studies were conducted to explore the relationship between social dominance orientation (SDO) and John Henryism (JH). Each study was framed using an intersectionality perspective which predicted that specific combinations of social identities would impact endorsement of SDO and JH in unique ways. We hypothesized that upper-class non-Whites would be higher in SDO and lower in JH than any other class/race identity combination. As predicted, a Class × Race interaction emerged for both SDO and JH in Study 1 ( N = 387), with upper-class non-Whites displaying the highest levels of SDO and the lowest levels of JH. Study 2 ( N = 340) replicated these findings and also explored the impact of context-level class on SDO and JH. Using a qualitative method, in Study 3 ( N = 23) we found that upper-class non-Whites described their social class positions in ways highly consistent with SDO, whereas middle/working-class non-Whites described their experiences in ways consistent with JH. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study tested the effects of multiple ideologies on support for restrictive policies against gay and lesbian individuals and organizations and if these effects were mediated by sexual prejudice. Social dominance orientation (SDO), conservatism, and right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) each had significant direct and indirect effects. SDO had the most consistent direct effects in addition to its effects through sexual prejudice. The direct effects of conservatism were smaller and similar in size to its indirect effects through prejudice. Although the direct effect of RWA was significant for policy attitudes, its effect was entirely mediated through sexual prejudice for organization opposition. Results suggest that high-RWA individuals adopt their positions largely because of prejudice toward sexual minorities, while high-SDO individuals adopt their positions partly out of prejudice and partly because these positions perpetuate hierarchies between heterosexuals and sexual minorities. Results also diminish the principled conservatism argument that conservative positions on these policies and organizations are absent of prejudice. As policies continue to be enacted that affect the sexual minority community, research is needed to identify the underlying motivations for individuals' positions toward these policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) has been conceptualized and measured as a unidimensional personality construct comprising the covariation of the three traits of authoritarian submission, authoritarian aggression, and conventionalism. However, new approaches have criticized this conceptualization and instead viewed these three “traits” as three distinct, though related, social attitude dimensions. Here we extend this approach providing clear definitions of these three dimensions as ideological attitude constructs of Authoritarianism, Conservatism, and Traditionalism. These dimensions are seen as attitudinal expressions of basic social values or motivational goals that represent different, though related, strategies for attaining collective security at the expense of individual autonomy. We report data from five samples and three different countries showing that these three dimensions could be reliably measured and were factorially distinct. The three dimensions also differentially predicted interpersonal behaviour, social policy support, and political party support. It is argued that conceptualizing and measuring RWA as a set of three related ideological attitude dimensions may better explain complex sociopolitical phenomena than the currently dominant unidimensional personality based model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The search for the personological roots of generalized prejudice (or ethnocentrism) began with the authoritarian personality, but in recent years, the twin constructs of right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation have been widely treated as the dual processes that lead to generalized prejudice. However, studies conducted for this article show that other constructs, notably empathy and principled moral reasoning, contribute important additional variance. Whereas authoritarianism and social dominance positively predict generalized prejudice, empathy and principled moral reasoning are related negatively to it. For the final study, a structural model of these relationships was tested. To fully understand individual differences in the propensity for generalized prejudice, it is necessary to move beyond the dual processes union of authoritarianism and social dominance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There has been considerable debate regarding whether Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) constitutes a global individual difference that predicts prejudice or is instead a product of self-categorization processes. Two studies addressed this issue by contrasting the predictive and discriminant validity of SDO and reworded SDO items assessing prescriptive attitudes toward inequality and dominance based on specific stratifications. Consistent with a global individual difference perspective, SDO predicted systematic between-person consistencies in attitudes toward inequality based on specific group-based stratifications. Moreover, SDO and specific stratification attitudes exerted reciprocal cross-lagged effects on one another over five months (Study 1, N = 252). These results indicate that SDO is partially derived from specific attitudes and experiences (a bottom-up effect), but once formed, SDO exerts a reciprocal (top-down) effect on specific attitudes and cognitions about group-based dominance across a range of stratifications. Cross-sectional analyses indicated that SDO also predicted generalized prejudice toward ethnic groups after controlling for ethnic stratification attitudes (Study 2, N = 138). Taken together, these results indicate that SDO reflects a global motivation to achieve group-based dominance that is partially determined by situational factors but not reducible to self-categorization processes associated with attitudes towards specific social groups or categories. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using data from a longitudinal study of college students, this study assessed the relationships among the threat perceptions of realistic threat and intergroup anxiety, the ideological motives of system justification and social dominance orientation (SDO), and political conservatism. Those who had higher perceptions of realistic threat and intergroup anxiety at the end of their first year of college showed higher levels of system justification and SDO at the end of their second and third years of college, controlling for precollege expressions of each variable. Higher levels of these two ideological motives at the end of students' second and third years of college were associated with more politically conservative attitudes at the end of students' fourth year of college, again controlling for precollege expressions. These longitudinal results are discussed in terms of a model of political conservatism as motivated social cognition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study explored the implications of an intergroup perspective on individual difference and situational influences on helping, specifically, outgroup members. In particular, we examined the effects of social dominance orientation (SDO) and group status threat on the amount and kind of help offered by Jewish participants ( n = 99) to Arab and Jewish students. Dependent measures were the likelihood of helping outgroup and ingroup members across various situations of need and, when help is given, the likelihood that it would be dependency-oriented rather than autonomy-oriented assistance. As expected, higher SDO individuals offered less help to outgroup (Arab) students, particularly when they experienced threat to group status, but not to ingroup members. In addition, higher SDO participants, when they did report that they would help, were more likely to offer dependency-oriented help to outgroup than to ingroup members. The theoretical and applied implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The American flag is a frequently displayed national symbol in the United States. Given its high visibility and importance, the present research examines the consequences of exposure to the flag on Americans' sense of national attachment. We hypothesized that the flag would increase patriotism, defined as love and commitment to one's country, and nationalism, defined as a sense of superiority over others. Two experimental studies supported the idea that the American flag increased nationalism, but not necessarily patriotism. The discussion focuses on the practices surrounding the American flag and its implications for the reproduction of American national identity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research shows that the motivation to be mindful is associated with less intolerance toward deviant and stigmatized groups. The present research examines authoritarianism as a possible moderator of this seemingly robust finding. We obtained consistent evidence from two studies that authoritarianism (right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation) moderates the relationship between need for cognition and punitiveness. Among low authoritarians, need for cognition was negatively associated with punitiveness and dispositional attribution of crimes and positively associated with support for rehabilitation of criminals. However, among high authoritarians, the pattern reversed. These results are discussed in the context of some recent advances in the understanding of motivated social cognition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examine whether two general dimensions of sociopolitical belief—right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO)—are rooted in insecure psychological attachment. Based on an undergraduate sample ( N = 255), we model the relations among attachment styles, general worldviews, RWA, and SDO. A structural equation model indicated that anxious attachment led to RWA but not SDO and that this effect was mediated by the belief that the world is a dangerous place. In contrast, avoidant attachment led to SDO but not RWA, and this effect was mediated by the belief that the world is an uncaring, competitive jungle in which people are motivated to maximize personal utility. We discuss the implications of these findings for the nature and origins of political conservatism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The cross-lagged effects of dangerous and competitive social worldviews on Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) were examined over a five-month period ( N = 165). Analyses indicated that the motivational goal for group-based dominance and superiority indexed by SDO changed as a function of the degree to which the social world was perceived as a competitive place characterized by inequality and resource scarcity. The motivational goal for ingroup conformity and collective security indexed by RWA, in contrast, changed as a function of the degree to which the social world was perceived as a dangerous and threatening place prone to high levels of crime and immoral behavior. These findings are consistent with the causal pathways between social worldviews and ideological attitudes predicted by Duckitt's (2001 ) model of the dual motivational and cognitive processes underlying prejudice. An unexpected reciprocal effect in which RWA predicted longitudinal change in dangerous worldview was also identified, suggesting that the relationship between these two constructs may be more complex than previously hypothesized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The additive and interactive effects of Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) and Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) were examined using 16 independent samples of New Zealand European participants (N = 2,164). Consistent with Duckitt's (2001) Dual Process Model, SDO and RWA displayed strong additive effects across various domains of intergroup-related attitude, including measures of racism, sexism, homosexual prejudice, and ethnic and religious in group identification. In each of these five domains, meta-analysis indicated that the statistical interaction of SDO and RWA accounted for an average of less than .001% variance in addition to their linear combination. It is concluded that the association between SDO and various discriminatory attitudes and beliefs is only extremely weakly dependent on RWA, and vice-versa, suggesting that these two ideological attitudes are primarily additive, rather than interactive, in nature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social dominance theory has generally posited that terror and intergroup violence can be explained in terms of social dominance struggles. Social dominance theorists have described terror mostly as a tool for maintaining intergroup hierarchies in society (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Although implications of the theory suggest that terror may also be used by lower status groups as a tool for the resistance of domination by higher status groups, this prediction heretofore has not been empirically demonstrated. Data from two samples, one in the United States and one in Lebanon, were collected regarding attitudes toward terrorism and intergroup violence. The results show that the American sample demonstrates the typical patterns of social dominance such that those who are higher in social dominance orientation tend to support greater violence toward the Middle East. However, the Lebanese sample shows the opposite pattern, such that those who are lower in social dominance orientation tend to support violence toward the West. These results suggest that (1) support for terrorism among Middle East citizens is a project of counterdominance, and, more broadly, that (2) the relationship between social dominance orientation and support for violence depends on the dynamics of the conflict and the status of the perpetrators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study tests whether the magnitude of the relation between Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) is stable across and within cultures, whether their differential relations with value orientations and sociopolitical attitudes remain stable in spite of these possible differences, and whether their differential relations point to a different genesis. For these purposes, two student samples (total N=684), three adult samples (total N=553), and a political activist sample (N=69) were gathered in Belgium, and one adult sample (N=235) was collected in Poland. Both cross- and intracultural differences in the strength of the RWA-SDO relation emerged. These can be attributed to specificities in sociopolitical context and differences in political socialization, interest, and involvement. In spite of these fluctuations, in the strength of the RWA-SDO relation, regression analyses revealed high stability of the relation between RWA-SDO and sociopolitical attitudes, and mediation analyses supported the hypothesis of their different genesis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study provides an empirical test of international relations image theory and extends the theory by emphasizing that individuals’ social identity and social dominance motives contribute to such images. One hundred forty-five Lebanese participants completed a survey that assessed their perceptions of U.S.-Lebanese relations, the images they have of the United States, their social identities, and their social dominance orientations. Participants were more likely to hold the barbarian image of the United States than the enemy, imperialist, or ally images. Participants also tended to perceive the United States as having relatively superior power, inferior cultural status, and goals that are incompatible with those of Lebanon. Consistent with image theory predictions, this constellation of structural perceptions was associated with stronger endorsement of the barbarian image. Furthermore, participants were more likely to endorse the barbarian image of the United States the more they identified with Arabs and Palestinians, the less they identified with Christians and the Western world, and the lower their social dominance orientation. Results highlight the importance of considering both structural characteristics and individual motives underlying international images and demonstrate the need for scholars to move beyond the enemy image of nations when describing international relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current forum is designed to assess the strengths and weaknesses of social identity, social dominance, and system justification as theoretical approaches to the study of intergroup relations. Each of these approaches tries to account for variation in the development of ingroup cohesion and outgroup antipathy among individual group members, across groups, and in different societies—three levels at which theorists have commonly sought explanations for variability in intergroup attitudes and behavior. Social dominance theory is the most ambitious of the theories but does not succeed in explaining intergroup relations equally well at all three levels. However, it has excelled in highlighting individual differences in the need and desire to dominate members of lower-status groups and in exploring the interaction between individuals and institutions. Social identity theory is primarily concerned with the attributes of groups that foster the development of ingroup bias and examines the conditions under which this occurs. It is more fully developed in this respect than the other approaches but ignores variation at the individual level and, to a lesser degree, the societal level. System justification theory considers a mix of individual- and societal-level factors, focusing on the role of support for the status quo in producing acceptance of status inequalities among members of low-status groups, even when it is against their own interest to do so. The theory highlights an important problem—the quiescence of low-status groups—but more work is needed to flesh out the theory and its central concepts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social dominance orientation (SDO) is a measure of general desire for group-based dominance. According to social dominance theory, the higher the status of one's group, the higher one's level of SDO should be. This study examined the extent to which between-group differences in SDO increase as the size of the perceived status gap between the groups increases. Data were collected in Israel, Northern Ireland, and the United States. In agreement with expectations, differences in SDO between arbitrary-set groups (e.g., ethnic and religious groups) were found to be greater when the status gap between the groups was perceived to be larger. In contrast, gender differences in SDO did not vary as a function of the size of the perceived status gap between men and women: Men had higher levels of SDO than women even when the gender status gap was perceived to be very small. These findings highlight the effects of perceived group status on SDO and the degree to which these effects vary depending on whether the salient group distinction is based on gender, ethnicity, or religion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]