Search

This paper explores the motivations and barriers behind the decision of economically disadvantaged Moldovans to refrain from migrating for better economic prospects. Drawing on 30 qualitative interviews with voluntary stayers, it uncovers a range of individual‐level characteristics that impede migration aspirations. These findings highlight the heightened sensitivity of lower‐wage stayers to their perceived social status abroad, their limited adaptability to new cultures and environments and their lower willpower to endure the challenges of long‐term gains. Moreover, this paper sheds light on their contentment with modest material gains and their aversion to migration risks. At the structural level, it emphasizes how social inequalities act as barriers for specific social groups, particularly the economically disadvantaged. These empirical insights challenge prevailing assumptions about the dominance of economic costs and network abroad in migration decision‐making, offering a fresh perspective on the social factors and costs shaping stayers' choices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Moving beyond prior research establishing people's preference for underdogs, we examined the role of social dominance orientation (SDO) in shaping individuals' preference for underdogs versus top dogs in intergroup competitions. Because a victorious underdog can be seen as a threat to hierarchy, we predicted that SDO would be negatively associated with underdog support. In the context of two real-world group competitions—i.e., the FIFA World Cup and the Olympic Games—we found that SDO was positively associated with a greater preference for top dogs rather than underdogs (Studies 1–3). This SDO effect on group preference was mediated by beliefs about international sports competitions as opportunities for hierarchy maintenance versus equality promotion (Study 2). Furthermore, SDO and top dog preference were positively associated regardless of the hierarchy domain—i.e., countries' economic power versus athletic achievement (Study 3). We discuss the theoretical implications of these findings for intergroup research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: We suggest that because racial discrimination claims made by Blacks potentially challenge the legitimacy of racial inequality, whereas racial discrimination claims made by Whites potentially reinforce the legitimacy of racial inequality, social dominance orientation (SDO) may differentially predict reactions to Black and White discrimination claimants. Consistent with this idea, Studies 1 and 2 suggest that negativity toward Blacks who make discrimination claims increases as a function of participants' SDO, while SDO predicts increased positivity toward Whites who make discrimination claims. Moreover, Study 3 demonstrates that differential reactions to White discrimination claimants as a function of SDO are particularly likely to occur when racial inequality is thought to be unstable; when racial inequality is thought to be stable, SDO does not predict positive reactions to White discrimination claimants. In all, the reported studies provide evidence for the idea that reactions to Black and White discrimination claimants may serve a role in respectively challenging or reinforcing racial inequality. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]