Search

The article examines the concept of democracy in Paleolithic hunter-gatherer communities and its relevance to modern democratic systems. It argues that these communities operated under a "reverse dominance hierarchy" system, which ensured political equality among members. The text explores the evolution of Homo sapiens from alpha male-dominated communities to more egalitarian societies and discusses the debate surrounding gender equality in Paleolithic communities. It also introduces the concept of self-domestication as a possible explanation for the evolution of cooperative human behavior. The article concludes by emphasizing the importance of understanding the history of democracy in order to rethink and improve current democratic systems. [Extracted from the article]

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]

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the actor–partner effects of attitudes toward group‐based inequality as measured by social dominance orientation (SDO) and marital quality, and the indirect actor–partner effects of SDO on marital quality via ambivalent sexism and partners' perceptions of their own relationship power toward their partner. Background: Previous research suggests that certain social attitudes play a role in relationship processes. However, it is unclear whether broader views on social inequality could have an effect on partners' marital quality. Method: Ninety heterosexual married couples in Turkey (N = 180) responded via an online survey on SDO, marital quality, relationship power, and ambivalent sexism. Actor–partner interdependence model (APIM) and actor–partner interdependence model of mediation (APIMeM) were conducted to examine the direct and indirect actor–partner effects. Results: For indirect effects, men's SDO was negatively associated with their marital quality through their relationship power and hostile sexism. No significant indirect effects were found for women. However, women's relationship power was positively and their benevolent sexism was negatively associated with their own and their partners' marital quality. Conclusion: Our findings help develop a more comprehensive understanding of how the political, social, and personal aspects of our lives are connected with one another. Implications: Our study points to the importance of exploring the topic of men's and women's views toward social inequality and its effects on their close relationships in clinical practice and relational education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This review critically assesses Niko Kolodny's theory of social hierarchy and its importance as articulated in The Pecking Order (2023). After summarizing Kolodny's argument, I raise two critical challenges. First, I ask whether Kolodny leaves us without adequate account of why social hierarchies are, in themselves, objectionable. Second, I query whether Kolodny's defense of representative democracy is decisive, and suggest that egalitarians should be open to alternative ways of mitigating the threat of hierarchy posed by political rule. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. The aim of this article is to write an original analysis of the work of Annie Ernaux (1940, Lillebonne). The author's production, which is being trans - lated to Spanish and is enjoying popularity in Spain, is inscribed at the intersection between sociology, literature, and history. Methodology. The framework from which we approach this study is the interrelation between critical sociology and feminist theory, taking the concepts that structure the thinking of its two referents: Pierre Bourdieu and Simone de Beauvoir. From the deductive method, we delve into her condition as a "declassed" and female socialization, which commits her to tell, from her experience, the truth of the dominated. Conclusions/discussion. In the conclusions, we highlight the articulation of her subjectivity in a constant conflict between the assimilation of gender roles and her political project: writing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Much research has examined the link between (anti-)egalitarian ideology and motivated social cognition. However, this research is typically framed around anti-egalitarianism, with the other end of this ideological pole, egalitarianism, often ignored altogether or treated as merely the absence of anti-egalitarian-motivated cognition. We integrate long-standing ideas from social dominance theory with contemporary models of motivated social cognition and a recent wave of empirical findings to argue that egalitarian ideology also drives social cognition in meaningful ways. We discuss why pursuing this avenue of research is important and outline several unanswered questions for future research. [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]

Social dominance orientation (SDO) holds a central position in social dominance theory. Since the development, validation, and publication of the SDO7 scale in 2015, which was designed to distinguish between the dominance (SDO-D) and (anti-)egalitarianism (SDO-E) facets of SDO, it has become common in the literature to distinguish between these facets using the SDO7. This is based on the theoretical proposition that SDO-D and SDO-E meaningfully differ and have different relationships with other constructs. However, the present study critically reviews the original validity evidence provided for the SDO7's distinction between SDO-D and SDO-E and notes conceptual and empirical reasons to question this distinction. Because a sizable number of studies have used the SDO7 since the presentation of that original validity evidence, the present study uses meta-analysis to leverage this burgeoning literature to determine whether there has since been more convincing empirical evidence for the distinction between these facets. The meta-analysis finds that SDO-D and SDO-E have a magnitude of intercorrelation that would often be considered adequate for a reliability coefficient (mean ρ =.83), have extremely similar patterns and magnitudes of relationships with the variables in their nomological network, and have nearly identical means and standard deviations. Although the SDO7 is a useful, reliable, and valid measure of overall SDO, its use to distinguish between SDO-D and SDO-E is not empirically supported. The present meta-analysis also provides insights into the nomological network of SDO-D, SDO-E, and overall SDO and the distributional characteristics of study participants' SDO scale scores. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This text aims to study the implications of the political, economic, and ideological transformations of the last four decades for the way we study social inequality and mortality in Mexico. It examines how such changes are manifest in their theoretical and methodological mutations. Based on the theoretical and methodological contributions of the critical analysis of discourse, it helps to shed light on the existence of social hierarchies among the actors involved in the object of study and replace relational approaches with other, gradational approaches in recent decades. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, we consider the problem of aggregating a collection of transitive fuzzy binary relations in such a way that the aggregation process preserves transitivity. Specifically, we focus our efforts on the characterization of those functions that aggregate a collection of fuzzy binary relations which are transitive with respect to a collection of t-norms preserving the transitivity. We characterize them in terms of triangular triplets. Further, the relationship between triangular triplets, the monotonicity of the aggregation function and an appropriate dominance notion is explicitly stated. Special attention is paid to a few classes of transitive fuzzy binary relations that are relevant in the literature. Concretely, we describe, in terms of triangular triplets, those functions that aggregate a collection of fuzzy pre-orders, fuzzy partial orders, relaxed indistinguishability relations, indistinguishability relations and equalities. A surprising relationship between functions that aggregate transitive fuzzy relations into a T M -transitive fuzzy relation and those that aggregate relaxed indistinguishability relations is shown. A few consequences of the new results are also provided for those cases in which all the t-norms of the given collection are the same. Some celebrated results are retrieved as a particular case from the exposed theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Political theorists often turn to seventeenth‐century England and the Levellers as sources of egalitarian insight. Yet by the time the Levellers were active, the claim that human beings were "equal" by nature was commonplace. Why, in Leveller hands, did a long‐standing piety consistent with social hierarchy became suddenly effectual? Inspired by Elizabeth Anderson, this article explores what equality—and the related concept of parity—meant for the Levellers, and what "the point," as they saw it, was. I argue that the Levellers' key achievement was subsuming a highly controversial premise of natural parity within the existing language of natural equality. This suggests that modern basic equality is the product of two, potentially contradictory, principles. This, in turn, has important normative, as well as historical and conceptual, implications for how theorists understand "the point" of equality for egalitarian movements today. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our concern in this contribution is to ask what the special features of populism in Hungary are, where government and the largest opposition party can be considered populist. The study aims at analyzing motivations, interests, benefits, and profits of populism in fragile Hungarian regions. The main part examines three peculiar features of state populism: the rural support for stabile political and social structures; early‐born conservative social policy, which freezes and preserves social inequalities and pacificates social conflicts; and selective social policy that has made a strong difference between "worthy" and "unworthy" poor, thus, contributing to ethnic‐based conflicts and emerging prejudice. The Hungarian case shows that poverty and social inequalities, disintegration, hierarchical local power structure with dominance of economic–political oligarchy, weak participation, monopolization of local and non‐local media, and racialization of poverty are enabling factors of populism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Theories of cultural evolution posit that cues of competence‐based prestige, rather than formidability‐based dominance, should guide culturally transmitted learning, but recent work suggested that French and Kaqchikel Guatamalan preschoolers place their epistemic trust in dominant others. In contrast, this study shows that 249 three‐ to six‐year‐olds (116 girls, tested between 2016 and 2018 across metropolitan locations with varying ethnic composition and socioeconomic status) randomly endorsed the word‐labels of dominant and subordinate agents in the egalitarian culture of Norway, using stimuli which solicit dominance inferences among infants and manipulating anonymity across studies to control for egalitarian desirability bias. A meta‐analysis estimated that 48% endorsed the dominant's testimony. This demonstrates that the tendency to endorse the epistemic claims of dominant individuals does not emerge reliably in early childhood. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After learning of the rape allegation against the Attorney-General, Australians were divided in their support for an inquiry. We hypothesised that motivated reasoning on this issue would be associated with ideological preferences. We therefore examined whether perceptions of arguments about the inquiry could be explained by participants' political orientation, preference for hierarchy (SDO), and motivation to justify the gender status quo (GSJ). Three months after the allegation was made public, we recruited a gender-balanced sample of 554 Australians to complete an online survey. Participants believed that an article arguing for an inquiry was stronger than an article arguing against an inquiry. However, this effect was weaker among those on the right of the political spectrum and those high on SDO. Political orientation was also associated with differing evaluations of the article's authors: left-leaning participants found the pro-inquiry author more credible, but right-leaning participants did not. GSJ was not associated with differing evaluations of the articles or their authors. These findings suggest that ideological preferences are associated with motivated reasoning when evaluating partisan allegations of sexual misconduct. Evaluations of such allegations appear to vary according to people's political attitudes and preferences for social equality or hierarchy. KEY POINTS What is already known about this topic: (1) In early 2021, Australians were deeply divided in their support for an inquiry into the rape allegation against Christian Porter. (2) Individuals tend to respond to political sexual misconduct allegations with a partisan bias. (3) Gender system justification (GSJ) and social dominance orientation (SDO) are associated with the denial of injustice towards women, and the maintenance of social hierarchies, respectively. What this topic adds: (1) Ideological preferences can help to explain how people evaluate arguments about the inquiry. (2) Participants on the political left and those low on SDO evaluated a pro-inquiry article as significantly stronger than the anti-inquiry article, but this effect was reduced amongst those on the right and those high on SDO. (3) These findings provide evidence that political orientation and SDO are associated with motivated reasoning when evaluating partisan allegations of sexual misconduct. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social dominance orientation (SDO) is defined as the individual disposition to accept hierarchy and dominance among groups. The measurement of SDO has evolved accordingly with the development of the theory, providing several versions of this scale. This scale has demonstrated indicators of reliability and validity across contexts, but it also has some limitations related to potential ambiguities and the phrasing of items. In this article we present the adaptation and validation of the SDO7 scale in Spanish for the Colombian context, where some of these limitations are addressed. In 2 studies conducted with conventional samples (nStudy1 = 394; nStudy2 = 867), we provide evidence for the psychometric properties of the scale and the predictive validity of its dimensions on social/political attitudes within the Colombian context. Factor analyses confirmed the factorial structure of two substantive dimensions of SDO (dominance and anti- egalitarianism). Regression analyses suggested that both dimensions, dominance and anti-egalitarianism, were accordingly associated with different attitudes that justify inequality: Dominance was associated with more explicit and hostile attitudes, whereas anti-egalitarianism was linked to subtler measures that maintain inequality. This article contributes to the comprehension of one of the processes related to the legitimacy of inequality and to the development of tools for its empirical research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although children are overall sensitive to inequality and prefer fair allocation of resources, they also often display ingroup favouritism. Inquiring about the factors that can shape the tension between these two driving forces in children, we focused on the role of parents. Extending the limited literature in this field, the present work examined whether individual differences in 3-to 11-year-old White children's (N = 154, 78 boys) evaluations of fair versus pro-ingroup behaviours in an intergroup context vary as a function of both mothers' and fathers' social dominance orientation (SDO), right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), and moral foundations. Parents completed a questionnaire. Children were presented with a scenario in which two ingroup members distributed candies to two other children, one White and one Black, either in an egalitarian way or displaying a clear ingroup favouritism. Afterwards, their attitudes towards the two ingroup members who had distributed the candies were assessed through both an Implicit Association Test and explicit questions. Although children displayed on average an explicit preference for the fair over the pro-ingroup target, this preference did not emerge at the implicit level. Most importantly, both children's explicit and implicit attitudes were related to mothers' SDO, indicating that at increasing level of mothers' SDO children's inequality aversion tended to drop. Overall, these results emphasize the relevance of mothers' support for social hierarchy in relation to the way in which children balance the two competing drives of equality endorsement and pro-ingroup bias. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With deliberative democracy becoming increasingly incorporated into political processes, the instances of citizens and politicians meeting in deliberation, so-called mixed deliberations, is increasing too. While these are important steps towards more deliberative systems, the mixed deliberation setting nonetheless introduces certain risks regarding equality. Citizens and politicians have different deliberative capacities, which could affect the process of deliberation. Moreover, political inequalities such as gender gaps may be more evident in deliberations where politicians are present. This study focuses on a series of mixed deliberations in 2018 about a proposed municipal merger in Finland. Using content analysis of speech acts (N = 3404) as well as pre- and post-deliberation surveys (N = 225), we analyze patterns according to participant status (politician/citizen) and gender regarding dominance, deliberative discussion quality, and impact on internal and external efficacy. The findings show that politicians dominated the discussions and achieved a higher deliberative quality than citizens. The findings also revealed that women achieved higher deliberative quality in their speech acts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study analyzed the effect of social threat, produced through a manipulation of socioeconomic status, on Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). A sample of middle/middle-high class students attending a private university in Lima, Peru (n = 58) was randomly assigned to one of two experimental conditions: increased versus reduced socioeconomic status. The experimental manipulation consisted in exposing the participants to a pyramid which describes the structure of society in terms of socioeconomic status and privilege, and then asking them to complete a short semantic task about what their life would be like if their life circumstances placed them at the top or the bottom of the social pyramid (according to the randomly assigned experimental condition). Subsequently, they were asked to complete the SDO scale. The ANOVA results show an increase in SDO levels in the reduced/lower status condition, with this measure remaining unaffected in the increased/higher status condition. These results are consistent with the idea that SDO is susceptible to modification by manipulating people's socioeconomic status. Likewise, the increase in SDO in the low-status condition supports the idea that, in hierarchical and unequal societies such as Peru, the mere representation of a threat (a decrease in status in this case) can trigger a defensive response, anchored in the adherence to ideologies that reinforce differences in status between individuals and groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dominance hierarchies have been well studied in myriad terrestrial animals, but surprisingly little is known about hierarchies in marine invertebrates; examples are limited to a few species of decapod crustaceans and cephalopods. Is the marine environment less conducive to the establishment of dominance hierarchy structures, or does this just underline the lack of detailed behavioral information about most marine invertebrates? In this review, we highlight the published information about marine invertebrate dominance hierarchies, which involve ranks established through fights or displays. We focus on the method of hierarchy formation, examine the ecological implications of this population structure, and compare the habitat and behavioral characteristics of species that exhibit this behavior. Because dominance hierarchies can influence habitat use, population distributions, energetics, mating, resource exploitation, and population genetic structure, it is crucial to understand how this trait evolves and which species are likely to exhibit it. A better understanding of marine invertebrate hierarchies could change the way we think about population dynamics of some species and could have important implications for fisheries, conservation, or even modeling of social and economic inequality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, I deal with stories that were told to me during fieldwork on lands that once were part of an enormous livestock and cotton plantation in the Agreste region of Northeast Brazil. In this work, which focused on the specific moment in which storied were shared, I am interested in showing how the stories I was told yield not only content but also the transmission of that content. This transmission leads into conventions and with them, the inequalities, hierarchies, reputations, moralities and sociabilities that permeate the stories told, allowing certain ones to circulation. At the same time, the focus on the moment of storytelling offers an opportunity to think about the actions that the narrative entails beyond its circulation, and its effects on social relations. Finally, I reflect on the stories analyzed in the article as moments lived, as complete and unique social experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intergroup contact is among the most effective ways to improve intergroup attitudes. Although it is now beyond any doubt that contact can reduce prejudice, in this article we provide evidence that its benefits can extend beyond intergroup relations—a process referred to as cognitive liberalization (Hodson, Crisp, Meleady, & Earle, 2018). We focus specifically on the impact of intergroup contact on environmentally relevant attitudes and behavior. Recent studies suggest that support for an inequality-based ideology (social dominance orientation [SDO]) can predict both intergroup attitudes and broader environmental conduct. Individuals higher in SDO are more willing to exploit the environment in unsustainable ways because doing so aids the production and maintenance of hierarchical social structures. In 4 studies conducted with British adults, we show that by promoting less hierarchical and more egalitarian viewpoints (reduced SDO), intergroup contact encourages more environmentally responsible attitudes and behavior. Both cross-sectional and longitudinal data support this model. Effects are more strongly explained by reductions in an antiegalitarian motive than a dominance motive. We discuss how these findings help define an expanded vision for intergroup contact theory that moves beyond traditional conflict-related outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study examined the asymmetry hypothesis of social dominance theory (SDT) in a work organization. The asymmetry hypothesis posits that members of subordinate groups who are high in social dominance orientation (SDO; desire for group-based hierarchy) can contribute to maintaining hierarchies by conforming with hierarchy-enhancing legitimizing myths and tactics used by members of dominant groups. Focusing on subordinates' perspective, we studied their compliance with supervisors' use of harsh power tactics, and whether this increased with subordinates' levels of SDO. At a hierarchy-enhancing for-profit organization, 207 subordinate employees self-reported their compliance with supervisor's use of harsh influence tactics and the perceived use of those tactics by their supervisors. The moderation analysis confirmed that the concurrence between supervisors' use of harsh power tactics, as perceived by subordinates, and subordinates' compliance with harsh tactics was moderated by subordinates' SDO. The higher SDO subordinates perceived a higher supervisor's use of harsh power tactics, the more they were willing to comply with those tactics. As the asymmetry hypothesis implies, this pattern can maintain hierarchies and even contribute to a spiral of inequalities within work environment. [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]

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]

As consumers’ political opinions become more divided and more central to their identities, it is important to understand how political ideology shapes consumers’ attempts to differentiate from others in the marketplace. Seven studies demonstrate that political ideology systematically influences consumers’ preferences for differentiation. Conservative ideology leads consumers to differentiate from others vertically in the social hierarchy through products that signal that they are better than others, and liberal ideology leads consumers to differentiate from others horizontally in the social hierarchy through products that signal that they are unique from others. This happens because conservatism endorses, and liberalism opposes, the belief that the dominance-based hierarchical social structure is a legitimate mechanism to distinguish individual qualities. The effect is robust across measured and manipulated ideology, hypothetical and real product choices, and online searches in conservative and liberal US states. Manipulating consumers’ differentiation goals and perceptions of hierarchy legitimacy mitigates the effect. The findings advance existing research on political ideology, social hierarchy, and consumer divergence, and they contribute to marketing practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We explore the relationship between group-based egalitarianism and empathy for members of advantaged groups (e.g. corporate executives; state officials) versus disadvantaged groups (e.g., blue-collar workers; schoolteachers) subjected to harmful actions, events, or policies. Whereas previous research suggests that anti-egalitarians (vs. egalitarians) dispositionally exhibit less empathy for others, we propose that this relationship depends on the target's position in the social hierarchy. We examined this question across eight studies (N = 3,154) conducted in the U.S. and the U.K., including online and in-person experiments and examining attitudinal and behavioral outcomes. We observed that (anti-)egalitarianism negatively predicted empathy for members of disadvantaged groups subjected to harmful situations, but positively predicted empathy for members of advantaged groups. This pattern held regardless of perceivers' own membership in advantaged or disadvantaged groups (i.e., perceiver gender, race, or SES). (Anti-)egalitarianism's differential effects on empathy for advantaged versus disadvantaged targets were attributable in part to differences in perceived degree of harm incurred (beyond roles for perceived value conflict and perceived deservingness): Egalitarians perceived the same action as more harmful than anti-egalitarians when it occurred to a disadvantaged target but less harmful than anti-egalitarians when it occurred to an advantaged target. We also explored how these patterns informed individuals' downstream policy attitudes and policy-relevant behavior (e.g.. willingness to sign a petition). Our findings enrich understanding of (anti-)egalitarianism by testing competing perspectives on the link between (anti-)egalitarianism and empathy, and by demonstrating when and why individuals' preferences for social equality (vs. hierarchy) lead them to extend versus withhold empathy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research on multiracial categorization has focused on majority group social perceivers (i.e., White Americans), demonstrating that they (a) typically categorize Black-White multiracials according to a rule of hypodescent, associating them more with their lower status parent group than their higher status parent group and (b) do so at least in part to preserve the hierarchical status quo. The current work examines whether members of an ethnic minority group, Black Americans, also associate Black-White multiracials more with their minority versus majority parent group and if so, why. The first 2 studies (1A and IB) directly compared Black and White Americans, and found that although both Blacks and Whites categorized Black-White multiracials as more Black than White, White's use of hypodescent was associated with intergroup antiegalitarianism, whereas Black's use of hypodescent was associated with intergroup egalitarianism. Studies 2-3 reveal that egalitarian Blacks use hypodescent in part because they perceive that Black-White biracials face discrimination and consequently feel a sense of linked fate with them. This research establishes that the use of hypodescent extends to minority as well as majority perceivers but also shows that the beliefs associated with the use of hypodescent differ as a function of perceiver social status. In doing so, we broaden the social scientific understanding of hypodescent, showing how it can be an inclusionary rather than exclusionary phenomenon. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents an argument in favour of rejecting dominance over rejecting ex-ante pareto in case ex-post egalitarianism is assumed to be true. It discusses the Personal Reasons Principle that involves no uncertainty and agues that it must involve violating dominance in cases which dominance conflicts with ex-post egalitarianism and ex-ante pareto. The author also explains that the conflict between the three principles should not be understood as a conflict between two moral perspectives.

The article discusses the modern egalitarian philosophy which guise of social justice. It cites that material equality is a motive of the commitment to relational equality and disruption of social hierarchy. The article also discusses that inequalities in wealth and well-being as part to inequalities in the distribution of social capital, which cannot be removed or transferred from one individual to another.

Anthropological studies highlight the importance of food in constructing and negotiating various aspects of individual and group identity, including social status. Archaeologists have also explored this topic, working with various types of evidence and frequently applying a diachronic p erspective that is usually inaccessible to other disciplines interested in foodways, such as anthropology. Previous studies examining how social status was established, maintained, or negotiated in Early Mycenaean Greece have relied heavily or solely on mortuary data, a necessity given the early focus on mortuary contexts for excavation and publication. In this article, I take a different approach and concentrate on settlement data, in particular the data deriving from those sites that have yielded evidence for the emergence of social inequality. Through the analysis of the cooking pottery repertoire, I investigate the issue of how food was manipulated by those competing for status. I argue that the appearance of innovative cooking utensils and their sets can be associated with changes in food-preparation practices, leading to more elaborate cuisine. Such a cuisine constituted a very effective means of social differentiation and was extensively used in the highly competitive environment of Early Mycenaean polities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Debate surrounding the issue of inequality and hierarchy between social groups has become increasingly prominent in recent years. At the same time, individuals disagree about the extent to which inequality between advantaged and disadvantaged groups exists. Whereas prior work has examined the ways in which individuals legitimize (or delegitimize) inequality as a function of their motivations, we consider whether individuals’ orientation toward group-based hierarchy motivates the extent to which they perceive inequality between social groups in the first place. Across 8 studies in both real-world (race, gender, and class) and artificial contexts, and involving members of both advantaged and disadvantaged groups, we show that the more individuals endorse hierarchy between groups, the less they perceive inequality between groups at the top and groups at the bottom. Perceiving less inequality is associated with rejecting egalitarian social policies aimed at reducing it. We show that these differences in hierarchy perception as a function of individuals’ motivational orientation hold even when inequality is depicted abstractly using images, and even when individuals are financially incentivized to accurately report their true perceptions. Using a novel methodology to assess accurate memory of hierarchy, we find that differences may be driven by both antiegalitarians underestimating inequality, and egalitarians overestimating it. In sum, our results identify a novel perceptual bias rooted in individuals’ chronic motivations toward hierarchy-maintenance, with the potential to influence their policy attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dog social behaviour has been well studied, but little is known about affiliative relationships between dogs. We report a yearlong study of dominance and affiliation in 24 dogs at a dog daycare facility and provide additional details on dog relationships through long-term observations of pairs of dogs who lived together in the same household or met frequently for years. Companion dogs formed highly differentiated relationships with one another. At daycare, some dyads affiliated and displayed one-way submission (formal dominance), others affiliated without a dominance relationship (egalitarian), and the majority of dyads did not affiliate at all (agonistic or non-interactive). The dogs in household environments showed formal and egalitarian relationships, and two dyads exchanged two-way agonism without submission (unresolved). Sex influenced the types of relationships dogs formed, with mixed sex dyads more likely to affiliate and less likely to exhibit dominance than same-sex pairs. Dominance influenced the nature of affiliation in relationships; egalitarian dyads were more likely to play and showed more equitable gentle affiliation. Gentle affiliation was reciprocal in the group as a whole, but it was highly skewed in many dyads, especially those with dominance relationships. Gentle affiliation was usually, but not always, directed up the hierarchy. Certain dyads affiliated at much higher rates than others, indicating that the dogs formed friendships. Most friends were mixed sex and/or egalitarian pairs, but friendships occurred in all of the sex class/dominance combinations. Long-term observations demonstrated how dyadic relationships can change over time. Such highly differentiated relationships suggest significant social complexity in dogs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An essay presents an argument to the absence of inequality in the Confucian philosophy. The author discusses the objections in the Confucian writings related to socioeconomic inequalities depicted in the Confucian rule of virtue. Also presented are the issue of inequalities among people distribution of power, and social hierarchies in Confucianism.

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]

The article provides information on psychological study on intergroup conflicts and emotional psychology related to it for development of power relations. Topics discussed include requirement of positive collective identity, social environment based on social equality, and predictions related to social dominance.

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]

A new conceptualization and measurement of social dominance orientation--individual differences in the preference for group based hierarchy and inequality--is introduced. In contrast to previous measures of social dominance orientation that were designed to be unidimensional, the new measure (SDO?) embeds theoretically grounded subdimensions of SDO--SDO-Dominance (SDO-D) and SDO-Egalitarianism (SDO-E). SDO-D constitutes a preference for systems of group-based dominance in which high status groups forcefully oppress lower status groups. SDO-E constitutes a preference for systems of group-based inequality that are maintained by an interrelated network of subtle hierarchy-enhancing ideologies and social policies. Confirmatory factor and criterion validity analyses confirmed that SDO-D and SDO-E are theoretically distinct and dissociate in terms of the intergroup outcomes they best predict. For the first time, distinct personality and individual difference bases of SDO-D and SDO-E are outlined. We clarify the construct validity of SDO by strictly assessing a preference for dominance hierarchies in general, removing a possible confound relating to support for hierarchy benefitting the ingroup. Consistent with this, results show that among members of a disadvantaged ethnic minority group (African Americans), endorsement of SDO7 is inversely related to ingroup identity. We further demonstrate these effects using nationally representative samples of U.S. Blacks and Whites, documenting the generalizability of these findings. Finally, we introduce and validate a brief 4-item measure of each dimension. This article importantly extends our theoretical understanding of one of the most generative constructs in social psychology, and introduces powerful new tools for its measurement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) was introduced as a unidimensional construct predicting numerous socio-political attitudes. However, recent findings suggest that SDO is composed of two sub-dimensions: dominance (SDO-D) and anti-egalitarianism (SDO-E). Despite converging evidence concerning their empirical differentiability, there is little consensus on how to best define them. Thus, we examined the correlates of SDO-D and SDO-E using a broad array of personality, political, ethnic and gender issue variables within a New Zealand national probability sample (N = 5,741) with European and Māori participants. SDO-D primarily related to the personality trait of honesty-humility, hostile and benevolent sexism. SDO-E primarily related to political conservatism and pro-Māori policies. In many cases, the predictive power differed between SDO-D and SDO-E, and across ethnic groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Racial segregation encourages members of historically advantaged groups to form negative intergroup attitudes, which then motivate practices of discrimination that sustain inequality and disadvantage. By implication, interventions designed to increase intergroup contact have been proposed as a means of reducing dominant group prejudices and promoting social change. In this article, we highlight another mechanism through which segregation shapes intergroup relations, namely, by inhibiting political solidarity between historically disadvantaged groups. Building on a field survey conducted in postapartheid South Africa, we demonstrate how challenging this form of segregation may reveal alternative mechanisms through which intergroup contact facilitates social change. Notably, we report evidence that positive contact with Black residents of an informal settlement in Pietermaritzburg was associated with Indian residents' support for political policies and forms of collective action that might improve conditions in that settlement. In addition, we show that such support was partly mediated by perceptions of collective discrimination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using a representative sample of Dutch natives, the current study examined the distinction between two dimensions of social dominance orientation [SDO-Dominance (SDO-D) and SDO-Egalitarianism (SDO-E)] and their relation with prejudice towards immigrant groups. Results showed that an empirical distinction between the two dimensions could be made. Furthermore, the relation between SDO and prejudice was fully mediated by hierarchy-enhancing (ethnic citizenship, assimilation) and hierarchy-attenuating myths (civic citizenship, multiculturalism), but in different ways for both SDO dimensions. Moreover, there were distinct paths between the SDO dimensions and ethnic prejudice for higher and lower identifiers. For higher identifiers, the relation between SDO-D and prejudice was fully mediated by the endorsement of hierarchy-enhancing myths. For lower identifiers, there was an association between SDO-E and prejudice that was predominantly mediated by the endorsement of hierarchy-attenuating myths. Copyright © 2014 European Association of Personality Psychology [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]

Development optimists in South Asia have argued that electoral politics and the reduced role of villages as centres of economic activity have largely put an end to exploitation by dominant castes. Although the political arrangements that have emerged out of these changes fall short of the idealized standards of civil society, various commentators have argued that they nevertheless benefit subordinate classes. Partha Chatterjee even argues that the ad hoc and extra-legal nature of these political arrangements - which he terms 'political society' - actually serve popular enfranchisement better than the law-bound activities of civil society, which he sees as captive to capital. On the basis of village ethnography from the Pakistani Punjab, I argue that political society is in fact integral to processes that dispossess people of their rights and to the reproduction of elite power. The paper illustrates how it is not the cold rationality of the state and the rule of law that disenfranchise subordinate classes, but their absence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the recent influx of studies suggesting the negative societal impact of inequality, many remain skeptical of these scientific findings. Across four studies, we explore how political affiliation and social dominance orientation (SDO) interactively shape attitudes toward the emerging science on the repercussions of social inequality. Acceptance of this science was consistently polarized based on partisanship, with Republicans exhibiting less acceptance of the findings than Democrats. Consistent with a solution aversion perspective, correlational studies showed that this gap in acceptance was related to Republicans' distaste for policies they presumed would be introduced to solve this problem, rather than a direct aversion to equality itself (Studies 1a and 1b). Supporting this interpretation, experimental studies that manipulated the content of likely policy solutions to inequality to be less inconsistent with Republican beliefs resulted in abated Republican skepticism of these same findings (Study 2 and Study 3). However, we also observed an important boundary condition to the solution aversion effect and evidence for another driver of this case of denial: social dominance orientation (Study 2 and Study 3). The value of testing and considering multiple individual differences when explaining motivated scientific (dis)belief is discussed. • Republicans deny evidence that inequality is harmful more so than Democrats. • This denial is due to their distaste for typical solutions to inequality. • When solutions are less threatening to Republicans, they exhibit less denial. • This solution aversion effect is relegated to Republicans lower in SDO. • Those higher in SDO rejected these findings regardless of the proposed solution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]