On Self‐Love and Outgroup Hate: Opposite Effects of Narcissism on Prejudice via Social Dominance Orientation and Right‐Wing Authoritarianism

Previous research has obtained mixed findings as to whether feelings of self‐worth are positively or negatively related to right‐wing ideological beliefs and prejudice. We propose to clarify the link between self‐worth and ideology by distinguishing between narcissistic and non‐narcissistic self‐evaluations as well as between different dimensions of ideological attitudes. Four studies, conducted in three different socio‐political contexts: the UK (Study 1, N = 422), the US (Studies 2 and 3, Ns = 471 and 289, respectively), and Poland (Study 4, N = 775), investigated the associations between narcissistic and non‐narcissistic self‐evaluations, social dominance orientation (SDO), right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA), and ethnic prejudice. Confirming our hypotheses, the results consistently showed that after controlling for self‐esteem, narcissistic self‐evaluation was positively associated with SDO (accounting for RWA), yet negatively associated with RWA (accounting for SDO). These associations were similar after controlling for psychopathy and Machiavellianism (Study 3) as well as collective narcissism and Big Five personality characteristics (Study 4). Studies 2–4 additionally demonstrated that narcissistic self‐evaluation was indirectly positively associated with prejudice through higher SDO (free of RWA) but indirectly negatively associated with prejudice through lower RWA (free of SDO). Implications for understanding the role of self‐evaluation in right‐wing ideological attitudes and prejudice are discussed. Copyright © 2017 The Authors. European Journal of Personality published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Association of Personality Psychology     

The impact of submissive versus dominant authoritarianism and negative emotions on prejudice

The two present studies tested the relationships between the negative emotions of fear, anger, and sadness and the social attitudes of right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO). It was hypothesized that these specific emotions interact with the social attitudes exerting an influence on prejudice toward outgroups with varying status levels. The emotions studied reflected general predispositions to experience particular affective states (Study 1) or were evoked by the activation of various emotionally-laden episodic memories (Study 2). The results revealed that anger increases RWA based prejudice and fear increases SDO based prejudice when a low status outgroup is considered. Sadness enhances both RWA and SDO based prejudice when a high status outgroup is targeted.     

Perceptions of immigrants: modifying the attitudes of individuals higher in social dominance orientation

Previous research has demonstrated that directly challenging people's beliefs about immigrants may result in even stronger anti-immigration attitudes, especially among those higher in social dominance orientation (SDO). In addition, inducing the perception that immigrants are part of a larger ingroup does not modify immigration attitudes. In three studies, the article explores conditions that can reduce prejudice toward immigrants among those high in SDO. Studies 1 and 2 demonstrate that focusing attention on group identity maintains prejudice, whereas focusing attention on others reduces prejudice among those higher in SDO. Study 3 extends the findings of the first two studies by demonstrating that focusing attention on others in a way that induces perception of similarity with immigrants maintains negative attitudes toward immigrants, whereas focusing on individual values reduces prejudice among those higher in SDO. Implications for how prejudice could be reduced among those high in SDO through de-emphasis on group identity are discussed.     

Right‐wing authoritarianism,social dominance orientation and prejudice against threatening and competitive ethnic groups

This research rests on the assumption that individual differences approaches to prejudice benefit from an integration of intergroup factors. Following Duckitt (2001), we assumed that two prominent individual differences variables, right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO), would differentially predict majority members' levels of ethnic prejudice depending on specific factors of the intergroup context: RWA as an index of motivational concerns about social cohesion, stability and security should drive prejudice against outgroups perceived as socially threatening, and SDO as an index of concerns about ingroup superiority and dominance should predict prejudice against outgroups perceived as potential competitors for power‐status. Across two studies (Ns = 82, 176), using between‐participants and within‐participants experimental designs, the effects of RWA on prejudice were particularly powerful when the outgroup was manipulated to be socially threatening, but the effects of SDO on prejudice appeared not to increase when the outgroup was manipulated to be competitive. In Study 2, presenting the outgroup as having low status also increased the effect of RWA, but not the effect of SDO. These results support the differential prediction assumption for RWA, but not for SDO. Implications for the conceptualisation of RWA and SDO are discussed. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Group domination and inequality in context: evidence for the unstable meanings of social dominance and authoritarianism

Both social dominance orientation (SDO) and right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA) are assumed to be general and relatively stable psychological orientations that individuals ‘carry with them’ from context to context, influencing responses to salient forms of intergroup inequality and domination. In two experimental studies we tested the relative stability of SDO (Studies 1 and 2) and RWA (Study 1). That is, we examined whether people who score relatively high on SDO/RWA in one context tend to support intergroup hierarchy and domination in other contexts. To do so, we manipulated the salience of different intergroup relationships before measuring SDO and RWA, and then observed the associations among these constructs and attitudes toward specific intergroup relationships and legitimizing ideologies (support for war, conservatism, heterosexism, and religious fundamentalism). Contrary to the assumption of relative stability, the extent to which SDO and RWA were related to these specific attitudes and ideologies varied markedly depending on the experimental context. These results highlight the contextual basis and meaning of individuals' expressed support for group‐based dominance. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Common Ideological Roots of Speciesism and Generalized Ethnic Prejudice: The Social Dominance Human–Animal Relations Model (SD‐HARM)

Recent research and theorizing suggest that desires for group‐based dominance underpin biases towards both human outgroups and (non‐human) animals. A systematic study of the common ideological roots of human–human and human–animal biases is, however, lacking. Three studies (in Belgium, UK, and USA) tested the Social Dominance Human–Animal Relations Model (SD‐HARM) proposing that Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) is a key factor responsible for the significant positive association between ethnic outgroup attitudes and speciesist attitudes towards animals, even after accounting for other ideological variables (that possibly confound previous findings). Confirming our hypotheses, the results consistently demonstrated that SDO, more than right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA), is a key factor connecting ethnic prejudice and speciesist attitudes. Furthermore, Studies 2 and 3 showed that both SDO and RWA are significantly related to perceived threat posed by vegetarianism (i.e. ideologies and diets minimizing harm to animals), but with SDO playing a focal role in explaining the positive association between threat perceptions and ethnic prejudice. Study 3 replicated this pattern, additionally including political conservatism in the model, itself a significant correlate of speciesism. Finally, a meta‐analytic integration across studies provided robust support for SD‐HARM and offers important insights into the psychological parallels between human intergroup and human–animal relations. Copyright © 2016 European Association of Personality Psychology     

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.     

The Relationship of Authoritarianism and Related Constructs to Attitudes Toward Homosexuality1

Two studies examined the relationships of right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA), dogmatism, social dominance orientation (SDO), and political‐economic conservatism (PEC) to attitudes toward homosexuality. Study I, a meta‐analysis, found that all 4 variables were related to attitudes toward homosexuality, with RWA having the largest relationship. Study 2 examined the relationships of the 4 variables to attitudes toward lesbians and gay men in a college‐student sample. Although all 4 variables had zero‐order correlations with these attitudes, RWA and SDO were the primary predictors, with RWA having the larger relationship. In addition, the zero‐order correlations of PEC and dogmatism could be explained by their overlap with SDO and RWA, and SDO partially mediated the gender difference found in attitudes toward gay men.     

Political involvement moderates the impact of worldviews and values on SDO and RWA

The Dual Process Model (DPM) of social attitudes and prejudice proposes that Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) and Right Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) reflect two distinct motivational processes. In two studies, we investigated how political involvement moderates the impact of social worldviews and value‐based dimensions on SDO and RWA. We proposed that political involvement constrains SDO, RWA and their antecedents into a tighter left–right ideological dimension, therefore transforming the double dissociation pattern of the DPM into a double additive pattern. As expected, for stronger political involvement, Study 1 (N = 237) showed that SDO and RWA were a function of both the competitive jungle and the dangerous world worldviews, whereas Study 2 (N = 143) pointed out that SDO and RWA were both connected with the value dimensions of self‐enhancement and conservation.     

The social costs of extrinsic relative to intrinsic goal pursuits: their relation with social dominance and racial and ethnic prejudice

Self-determination theory's distinction between extrinsic and intrinsic goal pursuits offers a possible explanation for ethnic and racial prejudice. Because extrinsic relative to intrinsic goal pursuits (E/I) stimulate interpersonal competition, they were expected to predict social dominance orientation (SDO), which, in turn, would predict racial and ethnic prejudice. Results of a first cross-sectional study showed that E/I goal pursuits are positively associated with prejudice and that SDO partially mediates this association. In a second longitudinal study, we replicated these results. In addition, however, we found evidence for a reciprocal relationship between E/I goal pursuit and SDO. Moreover, both E/I goal pursuit and SDO had an independent effect on increases in prejudice. Implications of these findings are discussed.     

The Ideological Legitimation of the Status Quo: Longitudinal Tests of a Social Dominance Model

Four studies examined whether members of the dominant group (New Zealand Europeans) who were high in Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) employed ideologies of equality-as-meritocracy to legitimate opposition toward policy-based resource allocations that favor disadvantaged groups. We tested this model, derived from Social Dominance Theory, using cross-sectional (Study 1; N =  338) and longitudinal data (Studies 2–4) collected in New Zealand. As predicted, SDO (but not Right-Wing Authoritarianism) exerted a cross-lagged effect on Equality Positioning and not vice-versa (Study 2; 1 year, N =  81); Equality Positioning exerted a cross-lagged effect on attitudes toward resource-specific social policies but not vice-versa (Study 3; 4 months, N =  132); and the cross-lagged effect of SDO on attitudes toward resource-specific policy was mediated longitudinally by Equality Positioning (Study 4; 1 year, N =  47). These findings indicate that the ideological positioning of equality is (at least partially) driven by individual differences in the motivation for group-based social dominance, and this in turn determines support for social and political policies that govern the group-based allocation of resources within society and thus systemic inequality.     

Group socialization and prejudice: the social transmission of intergroup attitudes and beliefs

In order to examine the social transmission of prejudice in the military, attitudes and beliefs of Francophone (minority) and Anglophone (majority) prospective military officers toward their own and other groups were assessed at the beginning and at the end of a four‐year officer‐training program. Consistent with social dominance theory and system justification theory, majority group members become significantly more negative toward outgroups (e.g. Francophones, civilians and immigrants) and more likely to internalize beliefs that legitimize the economic gap between Francophones and Anglophones in Canada. Moreover, as predicted on the basis of self‐categorization theory, the results show that identification with the category ‘Canadian Forces Officers’ assessed at the midpoint in the program, moderates the change in intergroup attitudes and beliefs. Finally, minority group members did not internalize negative stereotypes of their own group. These results provide important evidence for the role of group socialization in the explanation of intergroup attitudes and beliefs and suggest that social identification is a key factor in group socialization, consistent with self‐categorization theory. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Social dominance orientation,prejudice, and discrimination: A new computer-based method for studying discriminatory behaviors

A number of studies have shown that the scale of social dominance orientation (SDO), used to measure the degree of preference for inequality among social groups, is a predictive measure of social and political attitudes toward stigmatized outgroups. However, the relationship between SDO and discrimination has received little attention. The main goal of this study was to assess the validity of a new computer-based method used to measure discriminatory behaviors in a laboratory setting. An additional goal was to test the mediating role of prejudice in the relation between SDO and discrimination. The results provide a first validation of this new method and demonstrate that the effect of SDO on discrimination is mediated by prejudice.     

Authoritarianism, social dominance orientation and prejudice: Effects of various self-categorization conditions

One hundred and seventy nine students first answered RWA and SDO scales were assigned to experimental conditions that primed different forms of self-categorization, and finally responded for prejudice scales for three target ethnic groups. The results showed first, that RWA and SDO correlate with prejudice in a control condition. Second, RWA and SDO correlated differently with prejudice depending on the way in which membership to social group was primed. When a prime as member of a group oriented to devotion to the in-group norms and values was used, the correlation of RWA and in-group identification with prejudice was significant, but when a prime as member of a competitive group was used, only SDO correlated significantly with prejudice. The results were discussed as identifying two different schemas of social categorization according to which RWA and SDO expressed sets of social beliefs and attitudes relevant for inter-group relations.     

Social dominance and the disassociation between explicit and implicit representations of equality

This study tested whether social dominance orientation (SDO) predicted a conceptual disassociation between explicit (declarative or propositional) attitudes about equality and implicit (automatic or associative) views of how representative New Zealand Europeans and Maori are of the New Zealand nation (N = 48 Europeans). Explicitly stated attitudes framing equality in terms of procedural justice or meritocratic treatment were positively correlated with individual differences in the implicit tendency to view New Zealand Europeans as exclusively representative of New Zealand. This tendency to explicitly frame equality as based on individual merit and to implicitly favour the dominant (European) ethnic group as representative of the nation was observed only among people high in SDO. Our analysis provides novel support for the position that meritocratic ideology is malleable and may be employed by those high in SDO to frame concepts of equality and justice in ways that suit their desire for group‐based dominance. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Homophobia in physical education and sport: The role of physical/sporting identity and attributes,authoritarian aggression,and social dominance orientation

We examined levels of, and reasons for, anti‐gay and anti‐lesbian prejudice (homophobia) in pre‐service physical education (PE) and non‐physical education (non‐PE) university students. Participants (N = 409; 66% female; N = 199 pre‐service physical educators) completed questionnaires assessing anti‐gay and lesbian prejudice, authoritarianism, social dominance orientation (SDO), physical/athletic identity and self‐concept, and physical attributes. ANCOVAs revealed that PE students had higher levels of anti‐gay (p = .004) and lesbian prejudice than non‐PE students (p = .008), respectively. Males reported greater anti‐gay prejudice (p < .001), but not anti‐lesbian prejudice, than females. Authoritarian aggression was positively associated with greater anti‐gay (β = .49) and lesbian prejudice (β = .37) among male participants. Among females, higher authoritarian aggression and SDO was associated with greater anti‐gay (β = .34 and β = .25, respectively) and lesbian (β = .26 and β = .16, respectively) prejudice. The physical identity‐related constructs of athletic self‐concept (β = .?15) and perceived upper body strength (β = .39) were associated with anti‐gay attitudes among male participants. Physical attractiveness (β = ?.29) and upper body strength (β = .29) were also associated with male participants’ anti‐lesbian prejudice. Regression analyses showed that the differences between PE and non‐PE students in anti‐gay and lesbian prejudice were largely mediated by authoritarianism and SDO. The present study is the first to examine the relationship between investment in physical/sporting identity and attributes and anti‐gay and lesbian prejudice in PE/sport participants. In the present sample, anti‐gay and lesbian prejudice was greater in pre‐service PE students than non‐PE students, but these differences appear to be explained by differences in conservative ideological traits. Additionally, physical identity and athletic attributes based around masculine ideals also appear to contribute to this prejudice in males.     

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     

Individual Differences in Social Dominance Orientation Predict Support for the Use of Cognitive Ability Tests

This study investigates the personality processes involved in the debate surrounding the use of cognitive ability tests in college admissions. In Study 1, 108 undergraduates (M_age = 18.88 years, 60 women, 80 Whites) completed measures of social dominance orientation (SDO), testing self‐efficacy, and attitudes regarding the use of cognitive ability tests in college admissions; SAT/ACT scores were collected from the registrar. Sixty‐seven undergraduates (M_age = 19.06 years, 39 women, 49 Whites) completed the same measures in Study 2, along with measures of endorsement of commonly presented arguments about test use. In Study 3, 321 American adults (M_age = 35.58 years, 180 women, 251 Whites) completed the same measures used in Study 2; half were provided with facts about race and validity issues surrounding cognitive ability tests. Individual differences in SDO significantly predicted support for the use of cognitive ability tests in all samples, after controlling for SAT/ACT scores and test self‐efficacy and also among participants who read facts about cognitive ability tests. Moreover, arguments for and against test use mediated this effect. The present study sheds new light on an old debate by demonstrating that individual differences in beliefs about hierarchy play a key role in attitudes toward cognitive ability test use.     

Right‐wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation and the dimensions of generalized prejudice: A longitudinal test

A Dual Process Model (DPM) approach to prejudice proposes that there should be at least two dimensions of generalized prejudice relating to outgroup stratification and social perception, which should be differentially predicted by Right‐Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). The current study assessed the causal effects of SDO and RWA on three dimensions of prejudice using a full cross‐lagged longitudinal sample (N = 127). As expected, RWA, but not SDO, predicted prejudice towards ‘dangerous’ groups, SDO, but not RWA, predicted prejudice towards ‘derogated’ groups, and both RWA and SDO predicted prejudice towards ‘dissident’ groups. Results support previously untested causal predictions derived from the DPM and indicate that different forms of prejudice result from different SDO‐ and RWA‐based motivational processes. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Understanding Anti‐Arab Reactions Post‐9/11: The Role of Threats,Social Categories,and Personal Ideologies1

This study examined social psychological processes associated with anti‐Arab reactions (prejudice, stereotypes, and discrimination) following the September 11 terrorist attacks. Participants (N= 201) responded to an online survey. Perceived threats, self‐categorization, social dominance orientation, and just‐world beliefs were tested for their effectiveness in predicting anti‐Arab reactions. The results reveal that self‐categorization and social dominance orientation each individually accounted for a substantial percentage of the variance, while perceived threats accounted for a relatively small amount of the variance in anti‐Arab responses. However, an integrated model demonstrated that social dominance orientation, threats, self‐categorization, and a threat by self‐categorization interaction provided the best prediction of anti‐Arab reactions. Results are discussed in terms of the theoretical and practical applications for understanding out‐group derogation following political‐cultural world events.