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]

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]