The effects of realistic threat and group identification on social dominance orientation

Based on social identity and intergroup threat theories, we argue that social dominance orientation (SDO) can increase as a result of realistic threat, or perceived obstacles to the ingroup’s position and general welfare. However, this effect should be strongest among highly-identified group members, who are particularly concerned with protecting their ingroup against threat. Study 1 found that among non-Asian Americans, racial group identification moderated the relationship between perceptions of realistic threat from Asian Americans and SDO. Study 2 replicated Study 1 using an experimental, rather than correlational, design. Using different social groups, Study 3 showed that non-science college majors who identified strongly with their field of study exhibited higher SDO after being made to feel threatened by science majors. The results from these studies have implications for research on the meaning and antecedents of SDO.     

Political conservatism as motivated social cognition

Analyzing political conservatism as motivated social cognition integrates theories of personality (authoritarianism, dogmatism-intolerance of ambiguity), epistemic and existential needs (for closure, regulatory focus, terror management), and ideological rationalization (social dominance, system justification). A meta-analysis (88 samples, 12 countries, 22,818 cases) confirms that several psychological variables predict political conservatism: death anxiety (weighted mean r = .50); system instability (.47); dogmatism-intolerance of ambiguity (.34); openness to experience (-.32); uncertainty tolerance (-.27); needs for order, structure, and closure (.26); integrative complexity (-.20); fear of threat and loss (.18); and self-esteem (-.09). The core ideology of conservatism stresses resistance to change and justification of inequality and is motivated by needs that vary situationally and dispositionally to manage uncertainty and threat.     

Social dominance‐based threat reactions to immigrants in need of assistance

The present investigation examined how individuals higher in social dominance orientation (SDO) react to experimentally induced intergroup threat in terms of support for helping immigrants. Participants read editorials describing an incoming immigrant outgroup posing realistic threats (to tangible resources and well‐being), symbolic threats (to values and traditions) or no threats. Participants higher in SDO exhibited greater resistance to helping immigrants upon exposure to realistic, symbolic, (Experiments 1 and 2), or combined realistic–symbolic (Experiment 2) intergroup threats, but not when the same immigrants posed no threats. In Experiment 2, SDO exerted indirect effects on modern prejudice through both heightened infra‐humanization and intergroup anxiety, with modern prejudice itself predicting greater resistance and indifference to helping immigrants. Moderated mediation analyses revealed strongest SDO‐infra‐humanization relations under conditions of symbolic threat. Implications for prejudice‐reduction interventions are considered. Copyright © 2010 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     

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。     

Editorial: Animal Metaphors

Social dominance theory (SDT) suggests that prejudice legitimizes and maintains the existing social hierarchy. Consistent with an SDT explanation, it was predicted that (a) perceptions of threat to the existing social hierarchy and (b) social dominance orientation (SDO) would be related to stronger beliefs in stereotypes and "legitimizing myths." In addition, this analysis tests SDT's predicted interaction between perceptions of threat and SDO. It was predicted that for high SDO individuals the relation between perceptions of intergroup threat and the endorsement of legitimizing myths would be stronger than for low SDO individuals. These predictions were examined using a national probability General Social Survey archival data set. The results were consistent with our predictions and suggest that social dominance theory compliments and augments other threat theories of prejudice.     

What's in a grade? Academic success and political orientation

Expanding the literature on person-environment fit, the authors argue that political orientation is an important factor in shaping academic success in college. Based on social dominance theory, it was expected that academic disciplines that are more likely to provide students with future access to social and economic power tend to favor individuals who hold attitudes that strengthen the existing societal order. In a longitudinal sample of undergraduate students at a major American university (n=3,890), the authors demonstrated that student grades in these disciplines, but not in other disciplines, are positively related to a precollege measure of conservatism. This association between conservatism is consistent over time and subgroups, thus implicating higher education in the reproduction of social hierarchy. The discussion examines the causal processes underlying the relationship between political orientation and academic success in college.     

The Role of Threat in Attitudes Toward Affirmative Action and Its Beneficiaries1

This set of two studies employed the integrated threat theory to examine attitudes toward affirmative action (AA). The first study found that opposition to the policy of AA was predicted by realistic threats, symbolic threats, and personal relevance; while attitudes toward the beneficiaries of AA were predicted by three of the four threat variables (symbolic threats, intergroup anxiety, and negative stereotypes), and in‐group identity. The second study replicated and expanded on the first study and found that the effects of several individual‐difference variables (racism, anti‐Black affect, and political conservatism) on opposition to AA were mediated by three of the threats in the integrated threat theory (realistic threats, symbolic threats, and negative stereotypes). The implications of the results are discussed.     

Are needs to manage uncertainty and threat associated with political conservatism or ideological extremity?

Three studies are conducted to assess the uncertainty- threat model of political conservatism, which posits that psychological needs to manage uncertainty and threat are associated with political orientation. Results from structural equation models provide consistent support for the hypothesis that uncertainty avoidance (e.g., need for order, intolerance of ambiguity, and lack of openness to experience) and threat management (e.g., death anxiety, system threat, and perceptions of a dangerous world) each contributes independently to conservatism (vs. liberalism). No support is obtained for alternative models, which predict that uncertainty and threat management are associated with ideological extremism or extreme forms of conservatism only. Study 3 also reveals that resistance to change fully mediates the association between uncertainty avoidance and conservatism, whereas opposition to equality partially mediates the association between threat and conservatism. Implications for understanding the epistemic and existential bases of political orientation 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.     

Relations between risk perceptions and socio-political ideology are domain- and ideology- dependent

Public policy intended to address risks is largely determined by government officials who are typically elected by ‘the people’. Lay people presumably support political figures most likely to tackle the risks perceived as relevant. The present research investigated whether risk perceptions vary by risk domain and socio-political ideology. American community adults (N = 387) recruited using Amazon Mechanical Turk completed measures of right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), social dominance orientation (SDO), political conservatism, and perceived domain risks. Risk perceptions of conservatives versus liberals systematically differed by domain: Increases in political conservatism (vs. liberalism) and RWA were associated with perceiving “personal danger” hazards as more risky, whereas increases in SDO were associated with perceiving “competitive” hazards as less risky. A liberal-orientation was associated with heightened risk concerning collective (shared) hazards.     

A joke is just a joke (except when it isn't): cavalier humor beliefs facilitate the expression of group dominance motives

Past research reveals preferences for disparaging humor directed toward disliked others. The group-dominance model of humor appreciation introduces the hypothesis that beyond initial outgroup attitudes, social dominance motives predict favorable reactions toward jokes targeting low-status outgroups through a subtle hierarchy-enhancing legitimizing myth: cavalier humor beliefs (CHB). CHB characterizes a lighthearted, less serious, uncritical, and nonchalant approach toward humor that dismisses potential harm to others. As expected, CHB incorporates both positive (affiliative) and negative (aggressive) humor functions that together mask biases, correlating positively with prejudices and prejudice-correlates (including social dominance orientation [SDO]; Study 1). Across 3 studies in Canada, SDO and CHB predicted favorable reactions toward jokes disparaging Mexicans (low-status outgroup). Neither individual difference predicted neutral (nonintergroup) joke reactions, despite the jokes being equally amusing and more inoffensive overall. In Study 2, joke content targeting Mexicans, Americans (high-status outgroup), and Canadians (high-status ingroup) was systematically controlled. Although Canadians preferred jokes labeled as anti-American overall, an underlying subtle pattern emerged at the individual-difference level: Only those higher in SDO appreciated those jokes labeled as anti-Mexican (reflecting social dominance motives). In all studies, SDO predicted favorable reactions toward low-status outgroup jokes almost entirely through heightened CHB, a subtle yet potent legitimatizing myth that "justifies" expressions of group dominance motives. In Study 3, a pretest-posttest design revealed the implications of this justification process: CHB contributes to trivializing outgroup jokes as inoffensive (harmless), subsequently contributing to postjoke prejudice. The implications for humor in intergroup contexts are considered.     

Brexit or Bremain? A person and social analysis of voting decisions in the EU referendum

The period following UK's European Union referendum in 2016 foreshadows significant social and political change in the UK. The current research draws on social psychological theories to empirically examine the drivers of voting decisions during the referendum. We report the results of a prospective study using structural equation modelling with data (N = 244) collected just before, and self‐reported voting behaviour immediately following (N = 197), the European Union referendum. We employ a person and social approach to examine the additive roles of worldview, conservatism, social identity, and intergroup threat as predictors of voting intentions and behaviour. Results showed that person factors (worldview and conservatism) predicted voting intentions through social factors (European identity and realistic threat) and that intentions predicted behaviour. The results highlight the importance of addressing threat‐based intergroup rhetoric and the potential of common in‐group identity to mitigate psychological threat.     

Favorable Contact During Volunteer Service: Reducing Prejudice Toward Mexicans in the American Southwest

We assessed religious volunteers’ intergroup contact, realistic threat perceptions, symbolic threat perceptions, intergroup anxiety, negative stereotypes and prejudice toward Mexicans before and approximately 4–6 months into their volunteer service. Whether assigned to serve Mexicans or European–Americans, all volunteers experienced reduced prejudice toward Mexicans. A multiple mediator model suggests that changes in prejudice resulted from a mediated relationship between quality contact and prejudice. Specifically, intergroup anxiety and negative stereotypes mediated the relationship. The benefits of volunteerism as a means of fostering favorable intergroup contact and reducing threat perceptions and prejudice are discussed. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

WOMEN'S ATTITUDES TOWARD MEN An Integrated Threat Theory Approach

Three studies were conducted to measure the antecedents of women's attitudes toward men using the integrated threat model. Four types of threats were hypothesized to produce negative attitudes toward men: (1) realistic threat based on threats to women's political and economic power, (2) symbolic threat based on value differences, (3) intergroup anxiety experienced during social interaction with outgroup members, and (4) negative stereotypes of men. Negative contact was hypothesized to increase the perception of all four threats as well as to affect attitudes directly. The findings suggest that symbolic threat, intergroup anxiety, and negative contact are the strongest predictors of negative attitudes toward men. Contrary to expectation, realistic threat may not be important to women's attitudes toward men.     

Motivated Closed‐Mindedness Mediates the Effect of Threat on Political Conservatism

In this article we synthesize theory and research from several areas of psychology and political science to propose and test a causal model of the effects of threat on political attitudes. Based in part on prior research showing that fear, threat, and anxiety decrease cognitive capacity and motivation, we hypothesize that under high (vs. low) threat, people will seek to curtail open‐ended information searches and exhibit motivated closed‐mindedness (one aspect of the need for cognitive closure). The subjective desire for certainty, control, and closure, in turn, is expected to increase the individual's affinity for political conservatism, insofar as resistance to change and adherence to authority figures and conventional forms of morality are assumed to satisfy these epistemic motives more successfully than their ideological opposites. Consistent with this account, we find in Studies 1a and 1b that putting people into a highly threatened mindset leads them to exhibit an increase in motivated closed‐mindedness and to perceive the world as more dangerous. Furthermore, in Study 2 we demonstrate that a subtle threat manipulation increases self‐reported conservatism (or decreases self‐reported liberalism), and this effect is mediated by closed‐mindedness. In Study 3, we manipulated closed‐mindedness directly and found that high (vs. low) cognitive load results in a greater affinity for the Republican (vs. Democratic) party. Finally, in Study 4 we conducted an experiment involving political elites in Iceland and found that three different types of threat (to the self, group, and system) all led center‐right politicians to score higher on closed‐mindedness and issue‐based political conservatism. Implications for society and for the theory of ideology as motivated social cognition are discussed.     

The power of generosity to change views on social power

Intergroup helping behavior by high status group members typically functions to support and further entrench systems of social hierarchy (Nadler, 2002). This research examined whether the virtue of generosity could increase support for more egalitarian group relations, as indexed by reduced social dominance orientation (SDO; Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, & Malle, 1994). Pilot testing (N = 367) revealed a negative relationship between self-reported generosity and SDO. In Study 1, two long-term experimental manipulations of generosity in 110 college students reduced SDO. One manipulation involved a nine week community service learning project, and the other involved a five-part reflection paper assignment on generous individuals. In Study 2, a brief generosity prime in 58 college students reduced SDO scores. The potential benefits of targeting SDO directly, and the importance of examining the motives behind generosity are discussed.     

Ideology and climate change denial

Examining the relation between ideological variables and climate change denial, we found social dominance orientation (SDO) to outperform right-wing authoritarianism and left–right political orientation in predicting denial (Study 1 and 2). In Study 2, where we experimentally altered the level of denial by a newscast communicating supporting evidence for climate change, we demonstrated that the relation between the ideology variables and denial remains stable across conditions (newscast vs. control). Thus, the results showed that denial can be altered by communicating climate change evidence regardless of peoples’ position on ideology variables, in particular social dominance. We discuss the outcome in terms of core elements of SDO – dominance and system-justification motives – and encourage researchers on climate change denial to focus on these elements.     

Relationships between core ideological motives,social and economic conservatism,and religiosity: Evidence from a Turkish sample

The “conservatism as motivated social cognition” approach posits two core ideological motives underlying political conservatism across cultures. However, there is a scarcity of tests from non‐Western cultures, and much research has failed to distinguish between social and economic conservatism. Using a relatively large undergraduate sample from a non‐Western, predominantly Muslim country (Turkey), we tested the associations among resistance to change and opposition to equality motives, social and economic conservatism, right‐wing political orientation, and religiosity. In line with the “conservatism as motivated social cognition” account, we found that (a) social conservatism is more strongly related to resistance to change (rather than opposition to equality), (b) economic conservatism is more strongly related to opposition to equality (rather than resistance to change), (c) social conservatism is the strongest predictor of right‐wing political orientation among other conservatism measures, and (d) political orientation and religiosity had divergent effects: While right‐wing political orientation was related to economic conservatism, religiosity was inversely related to the latter, providing support for previous work indicating a resemblance between leftists and Islamists in Turkey. The results generally support the motivated social cognition approach to conservatism while also highlighting the importance of distinguishing between social and economic conservatism.     

The role of “dark personalities” (narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy), Big Five personality factors, and ideology in explaining prejudice

The so-called Dark Triad (narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy) represent correlated subclinical personality traits capturing “dark personalities”. How might darker personalities contribute to prejudice? In the present study (n = 197), these dark personality variables correlated positively with outgroup threat perceptions and anti-immigrant prejudice. A proposed two-stage structural equation model, assuming indirect personality effects (Dark Personality, Big Five) on prejudice through ideology and group threat perceptions, fit the data well. Specifically, a latent Dark Personality factor predicted social dominance orientation, whereas (low) Openness to Experience predicted right-wing authoritarianism; these ideological variables each predicted prejudice directly and indirectly through heightened intergroup threat. The authors recommend that personality models of prejudice incorporate both normal-range and subclinical personality predictors, in addition to ideological and social psychological mediators.