The Effects of Race and Social Dominance Orientation in Simulated Juror Decision Making1

Recent mock‐jury research often has found no evidence that White jurors are more likely to convict and impose harsher sentences on Black compared to White defendants. Drawing on social dominance theory (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999), this paper argues that this apparent null effect reflects that different racial biases shown by White jurors varying in social dominance orientation (SDO) cancel each other out. A mock‐jury study (n= 70) found no main effect for defendant race, but evidence for a crossover interaction with high SDO individuals showing an anti‐Black bias and with low SDO individuals showing a pro‐Black bias in their guilty judgments and sentence recommendations. The discussion argues race is still a critical factor in White jurors’ decision making.     

社会支配倾向研究的回顾与展望

社会支配倾向指个体对基于群体产生的等级制度及社会存在不平等现象的偏好程度。高社会支配倾向者认为高能力者应比低能力者获得更多的社会权利与社会资源;低社会支配倾向者认为社会应该按需分配,不存在等级差异。社会支配倾向会对社会阶层、偏见、政治态度、公平等现象的作用产生影响,是这些现象的重要影响因素。今后需要立足于社会支配倾向的本质与社会应用开展整合性研究。     

The Gulf War and the Rodney King Beating: Implications of the General Conservatism and Social Dominance Perspectives

Abstract

Both general conservatism and social dominance theory require relatively strong and significant relationships among indicators of racism, support for the Persian Gulf War, and approval of police actions in the Rodney King incident. With a nonprobability sample of 131 adults from Los Angeles, significant relationships were found among these variables as predicted by both theories. However, structural equation analysis disclosed that only social dominance theory was able to give a fully acceptable account of the entire matrix of correlations among the background and attitudinal variables involved. The data indicated that political conservatism, belief in racial superiority, caste-maintenance orientation, support of the Gulf War, and approval of police behavior in the beating of Rodney King were all significantly related to and possibly driven by a person's desire for group dominance (i.e., social dominance orientation). The relatively strong and consistent relationships among these variables were considered as possible evidence of a group-based form of ideological coherence (Converse, 1964).     

Perceptions of Police Use of Deadly Force

Recent police shootings of unarmed suspects have brought to bear harsh criticism of law enforcement use of deadly force. Two studies sought to investigate perceptions of police misuse of deadly force. Study 1 showed that as number of officers decreased and number of shots increased, perceptions of misuse of force were augmented. Number of shots per officer significantly predicted perceptions of misuse of force. Study 2 investigated the effects of social dominance orientation, blind patriotism, and right-wing authoritarianism. Results showed a significant interaction between number of officers, number of shots fired, and social dominance orientation. This personality variable was an especially strong predictor of misuse of force in situations involving the largest number of shots fired per officer.     

When and How Do High Status Group Members Offer Help: Effects of Social Dominance Orientation and Status Threat

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.     

Social Dominance Orientation and the Ideological Legitimization of Social Policy1

Much of politics is involved with the distribution of resources and the regulation of intergroup relations. Social dominance theory posits that social ideologies provide social justification for policies that have unequal effects on different social groups. In the present studies, we examine the mediating role that ideologies have in transforming people's general orientation toward group inequality into policy support. Using data from 5 samples, we offer evidence that social dominance orientation orients people to support discriminatory ideologies, which in turn influence support for policies. Support for the theoretical model was shown in studies of both long-standing social policy attitudes, such as toward social welfare and military programs, and of unfolding political events, including Clarence Thomas' nomination to the Supreme Court, the Persian Gulf War, and reinstitution of the death penalty in California.     

社会支配倾向研究述评

社会支配倾向是社会支配理论中的一个概念,它反映了个体期望内群体优于和支配外群体的程度。高社会支配倾向者偏好加大不同群体间的阶层差异,并期望优势群体更多地支配劣势群体;低社会支配倾向者偏好缩小不同群体间的阶层差异以增加社会平等,并期望优势群体更少地支配劣势群体。因此,社会支配倾向会影响社会不平等的程度,并可以被用来解释偏见的形成。性别和群体地位等情境因素会对社会支配倾向产生影响,而且社会支配倾向与个体间的支配也是有关系的     

Social Dominance Orientation,Gender, and Increasing Educational Exposure1

Using a large panel sample of undergraduates, we measured the social dominance orientation (SDO) scores of men and women once a year across a 4½‐year period. Employing repeated‐measures ANOVAs, we found that, even after controlling for the character of students' academic majors (hierarchy enhancing or hierarchy attenuating), males showed significantly higher SDO scores than did females across the entire college career. The data are discussed in terms of the invariance hypothesis within social dominance theory.     

U.S. Patriotism and Ideologies of Group Dominance: A Tale of Asymmetry

Abstract

Using a random sample (N = 405) of White and Latino Americans from Los Angeles County, the authors explored whether there is an asymmetrical relationship between U.S. patriotism and two different dimensions of social dominance orientation: group antiegalitarianism and group dominance. Although there was no evidence of asymmetry in the relationship between U.S. patriotism and group antiegalitarianism, there was evidence of consistent asymmetry in the relationship between U.S. patriotism and group dominance. Among Whites (the dominant North American ethnic group) and depending on demographic variables such as age, education, income, and gender, the greater the respondents' tendency to subordinate “inferior groups,” the greater their level of U.S. patriotism. In contrast, among Latino Americans (the major subordinate group in Southern California), the opposite trend was found. Here, higher levels of group dominance orientation were associated with lower levels of U.S. patriotism. The theoretical implications of these findings are discussed.     

Perceived Group Status Differences and the Effects of Gender, Ethnicity, and Religion on Social Dominance Orientation

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.     

Social Dominance Orientation, Authoritarianism, and Support for Intergroup Violence Between the Middle East and America

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.     

How Social Dominance Orientation Affects Union Participation: The Role of Union Identification and Perceived Union Instrumentality

Bridging social dominance theory and labour studies, this field study investigated the mechanisms underpinning the relationship between rejection of group‐based domination and participation in union activities. Respondents (N = 135) were members of a public sector union in California, that is, a hierarchy‐attenuating institution. Results revealed that union identification mediated the negative relationship between social dominance orientation and active union participation. Moreover, the mediational effect of union identification was moderated by perceived union instrumentality (i.e. outcome‐ and process‐based benefits afforded by the union), indicating that the relationship between union identification and participation was stronger among those union members who consider that the union affects workplace justice. The findings reveal the importance of both identity‐based and instrumental motivations underlying union participation. The novelty of applying social dominance theory to union behaviour is underscored. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Challenge of Being a Challenger: Social Dominance Orientation Shapes the Impact of “Challenger vs. Leader” Comparisons

The current research investigates when and how comparative advertising effectiveness is shaped by social dominance orientation (SDO), that is, the degree to which one desires to maintain the status quo in social hierarchies. We examine these issues with regard to “challenger vs. leader” comparisons that seek to change the relative standing of competitors in a product category by documenting the superiority of challenger brands over market leaders. Findings demonstrate that the resistance to change characterizing high (vs. low) SDO individuals makes them respond (1) less favorably to “challenger vs. leader” comparisons that seek to alter the existing category hierarchy and (2) more favorably to “leader vs. challenger” comparisons that preserve this status quo in the category hierarchy. The theoretical implications of these findings are discussed, as are avenues for future research.     

Tolerance of Sexual Harassment: An Examination of Gender Differences,Ambivalent Sexism,Social Dominance,and Gender Roles

In this study we examined the effects of gender, gender roles (masculinity and femininity), ambivalent sexism, and social dominance orientation with regard to tolerance of sexual harassment. It was predicted that women would be less tolerant than men of sexual harassment, however, men and women who were tolerant of sexual harassment would share ambivalence and hostility toward women, and they would exhibit higher levels of social dominance and masculinity. Results partially supported the hypotheses. Women were significantly less tolerant of harassment than men were, however, regression analyses showed that ambivalent sexism and hostility toward women accounted for the majority of total variance (35%), followed by gender (5%), social dominance (1%), femininity (0.7%), and nonsexism (0.6%). Masculinity and benevolent sexism were not significant predictors. Results suggest that ambivalence and hostility toward women are much greater predictors of tolerance of sexual harassment than is gender alone.     

Dimensions of Social Dominance Orientation: The Roles of Legitimizing Myths and National Identification

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     

Authoritarianism,Social Dominance,and Other Roots of Generalized Prejudice

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.     

The Gender Belief System,Authoritarianism, Social Dominance Orientation,and Heterosexuals' Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men

We tested hypotheses drawn from three theoretical perspectives—gender belief system, authoritarianism, and social dominance—concerning heterosexuals' attitudes toward lesbians and gay men. Data from 122 male and 131 female heterosexual college students with mostly White, middle-class backgrounds indicated that constructs postulated by all three perspectives played important roles in predicting attitudes: Gender differences in attitudes toward lesbians and gay men were mediated by social dominance orientation and gender-role beliefs, indicating that gender role beliefs may act as legitimizing myths to justify antigay attitudes. Authoritarianism had both a direct relationship to attitudes toward lesbians and gay men and an indirect relationship mediated by gender-role beliefs.     

Image Theory, Social Identity, and Social Dominance: Structural Characteristics and Individual Motives Underlying International Images

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.