Terrorist threat,dehumanization, and right‐wing authoritarianism as predictors of discrimination

This study analyzed the relationship between terrorist threat and discrimination, operationalized by support for retributive justice against Islamic groups suspect of terrorist crimes. Two experimental studies were performed. Study 1 (N = 215) showed that the terrorist threat against the ingroup raises the support for the retributive procedures through the dehumanization of the outgroup. Study 2 (N = 304) analyzed how the mediating role of dehumanization in the relationship between terrorist threat and support for retributive justice is moderated by right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA). In addition, the study aimed to verify if the dehumanization of outgroup and RWA could explain the relationship between terrorist threat and discrimination of Muslim immigrants. The results indicated that adherence to RWA favors dehumanization of the outgroup and, consecutively, the discrimination, operationalized as support for the use of retributive justice. The adherence to RWA has been identified as the mechanism that explains the discrimination against Muslim immigrants.     

Environmentalism,right‐wing extremism,and social justice beliefs among East German adolescents

This study uses a representative population (N = 3331) of East German mainstream adolescents to examine how the competing worldviews of environmentalism and right‐wing extremism differently structure social justice beliefs. Integrating three theoretical considerations (object of worry, scope of justice, and underlying values) it suggests that these two worldviews have implicit assumptions that associate them in subtler ways with some specific conceptions of justice. The environmentalist worldview was found to be associated with egalitarianism, which may be explained by environmentalism's concern with societal and global problems, its broad inclusionary scope of justice, and the self‐transcendent values it advocates. In contrast, right‐wing extremism was found to be associated with anti‐egalitarianism, which can be attributed to its concern with the welfare of the in‐group, its relative narrow exclusionary scope of justice, and its self‐interest values of competition and individualism. After controlling for the possible effects of gender and socioeconomic status, these claims were mostly supported by hierarchical regression empirical analyses. Moreover, findings showed that endorsement of the environmentalist stance is more common than endorsement of the right‐wing extremist stance. Finally, females tend to endorse the environmentalist stance and prefer egalitarianism, while males tend to endorse the right‐wing extremist stance and prefer the equity principle. Further internal and external validation of the constructs by means of the examination of their nomological network is recommended. Moreover, results of this study are discussed in light of globalization processes and recent developments regarding a “third position,” according to which pro‐environmental and right‐wing extremist views are intermingled, i.e., right‐wing extremist groups can advocate a pro‐environmental view just as pro‐environmental groups can adopt a right‐wing extremist position.     

Mitigation system threat partially mediates the effects of right‐wing ideologies on climate change beliefs

Research consistently shows that right‐wing ideological adherents are more likely to deny climate change. However, less is known about how right‐wing ideological subtypes are uniquely related to climate change denial, as well as what explains these relationships. This study examines whether threat to the socioeconomic system in the form of climate change mitigation policies, referred to as Climate Change Mitigation Threat (CCMT), mediates the relationships between Right‐Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) subtypes and four forms of climate change denial (existence denial, human cause denial, impact denial and climate science denial). U.S. participants (N = 334; M_age = 34.70, SD = 5.98) were recruited via Amazon MTurk. When shared variance in the predictors was accounted for, we found that: (a) Conventionalism (RWA‐C) positively predicted all forms of climate change denial; (b) Dominance (SDO‐D) positively predicted existence denial; (c) Anti‐Egalitarianism (SDO‐E) positively predicted both human cause and impact denial; and (d) Aggression (RWA‐A) negatively predicted existence denial. All significant direct relationships were partially mediated by CCMT, except for the direct paths between SDO‐D and existence denial, and RWA‐A and existence denial. These findings suggest that right‐wing adherents who conform to societal norms and prefer unequal social systems may deny climate change partly due to a perception that mitigation strategies proposed to combat climate change threaten the existing socioeconomic system.     

Explaining cross‐national differences in peer‐directed aggression: A quantitative synthesis

A quantitative review was conducted of cross‐national studies on peer‐directed aggression to determine whether cross‐national differences in aggression could be predicted from differences in national values. Cross‐national differences on dimensions of cultural‐level values derived from the works of Hofstede [1980, 1983], Bond [Chinese Culture Connection, 1987], and Schwartz [1994] were used to predict effect sizes of cross‐national differences in aggression for 185 comparisons between pairs of cultures from a total of 36 studies. Each of the three classification systems of national values were found to predict differences in aggression, providing support for their use in future studies. In general, cultures characterized by collectivistic values, high moral discipline, a high level of egalitarian commitment, low uncertainty avoidance, and which emphasize values that are heavily Confucian showed lower levels of aggression than their counterparts. Aggr. Behav. 31:00–00, 2005. © 2005 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

When threat to society becomes a threat to oneself: Implications for right‐wing attitudes and ethnic prejudice

The relationships between threat on one hand and right‐wing attitudes and ethnic prejudice on the other were investigated in a heterogeneous sample (N = 588). Specifically, we considered the perception of economic and terroristic threats in terms of their consequences at the societal and personal levels. Previous studies revealed that societal consequences of threat, rather than personal consequences, are related to right‐wing attitudes. However, the present results challenge these findings. More specifically, three important results emerged. First, items probing the distinct threat levels loaded on separate dimensions for economic and terroristic threat, validating the distinction between societal and personal threat consequences. Second, consistent with previous research, this study revealed that perceived societal consequences of threat yield strong and robust relationships with all target variables. However, personal consequences of threat were also associated with higher levels of right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA), social dominance orientation (SDO), and ethnic prejudice in particular. Third, societal and personal consequences of threat interacted in explaining the target variables. More specifically, feeling personally threatened by terrorism was only related to higher levels of RWA in the presence of low levels of threat to society, whereas experiencing personal economic threat was only related to higher levels of SDO and ethnic prejudice when high societal economic threat was experienced. In sum, although the perception of societal consequences of threat plays a prominent role in explaining right‐wing attitudes and ethnic prejudice, the perception of being personally affected by threat is also associated with higher levels of RWA and SDO, and especially ethnic prejudice.     

Effects of social dominance orientation and right‐wing authoritarianism on corrupt intention: The role of moral outrage

Previous research suggested that dominance orientation and authoritarianism may be associated with corruption, but little research has verified this assumption or uncovered its psychological processes. In this article, we examined empirically the relationships between social dominance orientation (SDO), right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA) and corrupt intention and explored the mediating role of moral outrage on these relationships. A total of 677 college students participated in the study and completed measures of SDO, RWA, moral outrage and corrupt intention. Our findings demonstrated that both SDO and RWA were positively associated with corrupt intention. Additionally, moral outrage partially mediated the relation between SDO and corrupt intention and fully mediated the relation between RWA and corrupt intention. Specifically, the results indicated that higher SDO or RWA was associated with reduced moral outrage and increased corrupt intention. This implies that the enhancement of morality and moral outrage may inhibit corrupt intention.     

Endorsement of sexist ideology in Taiwan and the United States: Social dominance orientation,right‐wing authoritarianism,and deferential family norms

Despite close relationships between men and women in daily lives, gender inequality is ubiquitous and often supported by sexist ideology. The understanding of potential bases of sexist ideology is thus important. According to Duckitt's dual‐process model (2001), different worldviews may explain different types of sexist ideology. Individuals who hold a “competitive world” worldview tend to endorse group‐based dominance. This lends itself to the endorsement of hostile sexism, because hostile sexism is an obvious form of male dominance. Conversely, individuals who hold a “dangerous world” worldview tend to adhere to social cohesion, collective security, and social traditions. This lends itself to the endorsement of benevolent sexism, because benevolent sexism values women who conform to gender norms. As predicted by Duckitt's model, research has shown that social dominance orientation, a general orientation towards the endorsement of group‐based dominance, is closely associated with hostile sexism. Furthermore, right‐wing authoritarianism, which measures adherence to social traditions, is closely associated with benevolent sexism. Due to the interdependent nature of gender relationships, the current research proposed that a relationship‐based belief in hierarchy, deferential family norms, and norms depicting proper manners among family members should predict the endorsement of hostile and benevolent sexism, after controlling for social dominance orientation and right‐wing authoritarianism. As predicted, according to student samples collected in Taiwan and the US, the endorsement of deferential family norms predicted the endorsement of hostile sexism and of benevolent sexism, respectively. In addition, among men and women, social dominance orientation predicted hostile sexism more strongly (as opposed to benevolent sexism), whereas right‐wing authoritarianism predicted benevolent sexism more strongly (as opposed to hostile sexism). Implications regarding relationship norms, social dominance orientation, right‐wing authoritarianism, and sexist ideology are discussed.     

Looking down and ramping up: The impact of status differences on effort in intergroup contexts

This paper examines how the status of an out-group impacts effort in intergroup settings. The results provide evidence that people work harder when their individual performance is compared to a lower, as opposed to higher, status out-group member. Moreover, comparisons to a lower status out-group were found to elicit motivation gains as these participants worked harder than participants in the control (Studies 1-3) or in-group comparison conditions (Studies 2 and 3). In Study 4, evidence for the role of threat as an underlying mechanism was provided as gains in effort for those compared with a lower status out-group member were eliminated when participants self- or group-affirmed prior to comparison. Finally, Study 5 shows that both social identity threat and self-categorization threat underlie increases in effort for participants compared to a lower status out-group member. We detail a theoretical basis for our claim that performance comparisons with lower status out-group members are especially threatening, and discuss the implications for this research in terms of social identity and self-categorization theories as they relate to effort in intergroup contexts.     

Relation between perception of differences and intergroup anxiety: moderator and mediator variables

This research has two aims: first, to determine the relationship between the intergroup differences perceived and the anxiety experienced by ingroup members in their contact with members of the outgroup. Second, to examine the moderator and/or mediator role of a series of variables considered relevant in the literature on intergroup prejudice, take into account Baron and Kenny's (1986) requeriments. This analysis is carried out from the perspective of the minority group, in this case Moroccan inmigrants to Almería. The results confirm the moderating role of the variables pressure to assimilate and perception of xenophobia and the mediating role of inmigrants' attitude towards local people and social paranoia.     

Does authoritarianism imply ethnocentric national attitudes: A revised look at the “authoritarian triad” and right‐wing ideology

Dozens of studies have shown that authoritarian people are ethnocentric. They are described as nationalistic, prejudiced, and hostile toward ethnic/national out‐groups. However, it can be argued that this critical claim remains unproven, as researchers do not take into consideration the very conservative right‐wing views typical of authoritarian people. To address this problem, two theoretical approaches were contrasted: the most commonly used right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA) approach and the group authoritarianism approach. Both approaches define authoritarianism as the covariance of submission, aggression, and conventionalism, but they differ in that the former is inextricably related to right‐wing ideology while the latter is not. This paper presents the results of two survey studies conducted on samples of 600 and 400 respondents. In Study 1, it was found that RWA and group authoritarianism had different patterns of relationships with in‐group and out‐group national attitudes, providing strong evidence in support of the hypothesis that the right‐wing ideology generated ethnocentric national attitudes. Study 2 showed a strong direct effect of right‐wing ideology on ethnocentric national attitudes, while the impact of “pure” authoritarian covariance is marginal and sometimes even seems to be negative (e.g., ethnic prejudices). These findings suggest that authoritarianism has little to do with ethnocentric national attitudes. It is not the covariance of authoritarian attitudes that results in growing ethnocentrism. The true perpetrator can be found in the large component of right‐wing ideology contained in such measurement instruments as the RWA scale.     

Mechanisms of moral disengagement and their differential use by right‐wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation in support of war

Right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) are associated with the approval of war as a political intervention [McFarland, 2005]. We examined whether the effects of RWA and SDO on war support are mediated by moral‐disengagement mechanisms [i.e., responsibility reduction, moral justification, minimizing consequences, and dehumanizing–blaming victims; Bandura, 1999] and whether the ideologies use the mechanisms differently. Our data were consistent with the possibility that minimizing consequences (Study 1) and moral justification (Study 2) mediate the effects of RWA and SDO on approval of war. Both ideologies were positively associated with all moral‐disengagement mechanism though more strongly so for RWA. Comparisons within ideologies suggest that RWA was most strongly associated with moral justification and SDO was most strongly associated with dehumanizing–blaming victims. We discuss implications and limitations. Aggr. Behav. 36:238–250, 2010. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Cultural differences in attitude toward and effects of self‐doubt

It has been argued that the high achievement of Confucian Asian students is at the cost of their psychological well‐being, since high self‐doubt consistently accompanies their high achievement. However, other researchers cautioned that the attitude toward self‐doubt could be different in Asian versus Western cultures. This study examined the debate with a survey of both American and Chinese college students that measured level of self‐doubt, attitude toward self‐doubt, beliefs about ability, and psychological well‐being outcomes. As hypothesized, Chinese students showed a more positive attitude toward self‐doubt than American students, despite having higher level of self‐doubt. Furthermore, self‐doubt engendered less negative consequences on Chinese students' psychological well‐being, relative to American students. Implications for theories and research on cultural differences in the effects of self‐constructs are discussed.     

Well‐being in cross‐cultural transitions: discrepancies between acculturation preferences and actual intergroup and intragroup contact

Two studies examined the effect of acculturation–contact discrepancies on well‐being. Specifically, we tested the prediction that well‐being will be compromised when cultural minorities' acculturation preferences are not met by the intergroup and intragroup contact in a new society. Study 1 found that for Polish immigrants (n = 55) acculturation–contact discrepancies were associated with compromised well‐being. Study 2 followed a cohort of international students (n = 106) for a period of two academic years. Results suggested that discrepancies in students' acculturation–contact in their first year had harmful consequences for their well‐being 1 year later. Overall, the two studies show that discrepancies between acculturation preferences and actual contact have negative implications for the psychological adaptation of acculturating individuals.     

The divisive potential of differences and similarities: The role of intergroup distinctiveness in intergroup differentiation

In this article we examine the relationship between perceptions of intergroup distinctiveness and intergroup differentiation. Research in this area has highlighted two contrasting hypotheses: high distinctiveness is predicted to lead to increased intergroup differentiation (self-categorisation theory), while low distinctiveness or too much similarity can also underlie positive differentiation (social identity theory). We argue for a theoretical integration of these predictions and outline their domains of applicability. In addition to empirical studies from our own laboratory, support for these hypotheses in the literature is examined meta-analytically, and we assess the power of a number of moderators of the distinctiveness ‐ differentiation relation. We focus on group identification and salience of the superordinate category as the most powerful moderators of this relation. We report evidence that low group distinctiveness leads to more differentiation for high identifiers, while high group distinctiveness leads to more differentiation for low identifiers. In addition, our meta-analysis revealed that when the superordinate category was not salient, low distinctiveness tended to lead to differentiation (albeit not significantly so) while high distinctiveness led to differentiation when the salience of the superordinate category was high. A model is proposed integrating our predictions concerning moderators of the distinctiveness ‐ differentiation relation. Theoretical implications of these findings are discussed and we suggest directions for future research.     

How a terror attack affects right‐wing authoritarianism,social dominance orientation,and their relationship to torture attitudes

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.     

The evolution of intergroup bias: perceptions and attitudes in rhesus macaques

Social psychologists have learned a great deal about the nature of intergroup conflict and the attitudinal and cognitive processes that enable it. Less is known about where these processes come from in the first place. In particular, do our strategies for dealing with other groups emerge in the absence of human-specific experiences? One profitable way to answer this question has involved administering tests that are conceptual equivalents of those used with adult humans in other species, thereby exploring the continuity or discontinuity of psychological processes. We examined intergroup preferences in a nonhuman species, the rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta). We found the first evidence that a nonhuman species automatically distinguishes the faces of members of its own social group from those in other groups and displays greater vigilance toward outgroup members (Experiments 1-3). In addition, we observed that macaques spontaneously associate novel objects with specific social groups and display greater vigilance to objects associated with outgroup members (Experiments 4-5). Finally, we developed a looking time procedure-the Looking Time Implicit Association Test, which resembles the Implicit Association Test (Greenwald & Banaji, 1995)-and we discovered that macaques, like humans, automatically evaluate ingroup members positively and outgroup members negatively (Experiments 6-7). These field studies represent the first controlled experiments to examine the presence of intergroup attitudes in a nonhuman species. As such, these studies suggest that the architecture of the mind that enables the formation of these biases may be rooted in phylogenetically ancient mechanisms.     

Social identity,relative group status and intergroup attitudes: when favourable outcomes change intergroup relations…for the worse

This study examines in a natural setting (N = 253) the effects of favourable outcomes at the individual and group levels on the relations between members of high (nondisabled) and low (disabled) status groups. Consistent with past research, the results show that, overall, high‐status group members are more likely than low‐status group members to display ingroup bias. Furthermore, as hypothesized on the basis of the role of relative gratification in intergroup relations, a favourable group outcome led high‐status group members to derogate the low‐status outgroup. On the other hand, as predicted from the assumption that outgroup favouritism reflects a strategy of individual mobility, a favourable individual outcome led low‐status group members to display an evaluative bias in favour of, and to identify with, the high‐status outgroup. The implications of these findings for the explanation of outgroup favouritism and outgroup derogation are discussed. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

When differences matter: intergroup distinctiveness and the evaluation of impostors

The present study examined the effect of intergroup distinctiveness and group membership on evaluations of impostors. We predicted that ingroup members would be harsher than outgroup members on an impostor and that perceptions of intergroup distinctiveness would further moderate these evaluations. Specifically, we tested the social identity theory prediction that low intergroup distinctiveness would lead to greater derogation of the impostor (the ‘reactive distinctiveness’ hypothesis) against the self‐categorization hypothesis that high intergroup distinctiveness would instigate more derogation of an impostor (the ‘reflective distinctiveness’ hypothesis). In this study, vegetarians (ingroup members) and meat eaters (outgroup members) were presented with a target claiming to be vegetarian, but caught indulging in a meat dish. We found that ingroup members derogated the impostor more and felt less pleased about discovering the impostor behaviour than did outgroup members. In line with the reflective distinctiveness hypothesis, the heightened derogation displayed by ingroup members only emerged when intergroup distinctiveness was high, an effect that was mediated by ratings of group identification. The discussion focuses on the different responses intergroup distinctiveness may evoke. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

System‐perpetuating asymmetries between explicit and implicit intergroup attitudes among indigenous and non‐indigenous Chileans

The present research demonstrates a dissociation between explicit and implicit intergroup evaluation in the reciprocal attitudes between indigenous (Mapuche) and non‐indigenous Chileans. In both social groups, the explicit measures of attitudes towards the respective in‐group and out‐group were compared with the Implicit Association Test scores. The results indicate that the members of the low‐status minority might explicitly express a moderate evaluative preference for their in‐group but might implicitly devalue it. Conversely, the members of the high‐status majority might implicitly devalue their out‐group but might explicitly express no bias. These results are theoretically framed in terms of system justification, conventional stereotypes and motivated correction processes.