Search

The authors have underlined the influence of issues of power and ideology on the stigma of schizophrenia. The dual‐process cognitive‐motivational model of ideology and prejudice has shown that for deviant and derogated groups, such as people with schizophrenia, both authoritarianism and social dominance orientation can predict prejudice. However, this model has not been tested in relation to the stigma of schizophrenia. In this paper, we apply the Dual Process Model to the study of stigmatizing attitudes, in two contexts where the model has not been tested before, France (N = 224), and Greece (N = 238). We tested the relation of the model's two pathways (dominance‐competitiveness and authoritarianism‐dangerousness) to stigmatizing attitudes, while making the hypothesis that both would be associated with the latter since people with schizophrenia are perceived as both derogate/subordinate and deviant/threatening. Our results show that the models adequately fit the data and partly confirm the pathways predicted by previous research. However, for the Greek sample, the dominance‐competitiveness component was not significantly associated with stigmatizing attitudes, suggesting that for this sample, people with schizophrenia are mainly stigmatized in terms of deviance/threat. Our results provide evidence for the DPM's application to the study of the stigma of schizophrenia in two contexts where the model has never been applied and underline the importance of ideological and socio‐cognitive factors for community interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Self‐reported level of right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA), the two facets of social dominance orientation (SDO‐Dominance and SDO‐Egalitarianism) and pro‐torture attitudes were measured both in the immediate aftermath (terror salience, N = 152) of the terror attacks in Paris and Brussels and when terrorism was not salient (non‐salience, N = 140). Results showed that RWA and pro‐torture attitudes, but not SDO‐Dominance and SDO‐Egalitarianism, were significantly higher immediately after. Furthermore, RWA and SDO both predicted pro‐torture attitudes more strongly under terror salience. We argue that the reason why RWA is higher under terror salience is a response to external threat, and that SDO‐Dominance may be more clearly related to acceptance of torture and other human‐rights violations, across context. Future research on the effects of terror‐related events on sociopolitical and pro‐torture attitudes should focus on person‐situation interactions and also attempt to discriminate between trait and state aspects of authoritarianism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]