Social Dominance Orientation and Right-Wing Authoritarianism: Additive and Interactive Effects

The additive and interactive effects of Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) and Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) were examined using 16 independent samples of New Zealand European participants ( N =  2,164). Consistent with Duckitt's (2001) Dual Process Model, SDO and RWA displayed strong additive effects across various domains of intergroup-related attitude, including measures of racism, sexism, homosexual prejudice, and ethnic and religious ingroup identification. In each of these five domains, meta-analysis indicated that the statistical interaction of SDO and RWA accounted for an average of less than .001% variance in addition to their linear combination. It is concluded that the association between SDO and various discriminatory attitudes and beliefs is only extremely weakly dependent on RWA, and vice-versa, suggesting that these two ideological attitudes are primarily additive, rather than interactive, in nature.     

Big-Five personality prospectively predicts Social Dominance Orientation and Right-Wing Authoritarianism

A full cross-lagged panel design examined the bidirectional effects of the Big-Five personality dimensions on Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) and Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) over 9 months (N = 190 undergraduates). Consistent with the Dual Process Cognitive-Motivational Model, SDO and RWA exhibited markedly different personality bases. Low Agreeableness predicted change in the motivational goal for group-based dominance and superiority (SDO), whereas Openness to Experience predicted change in the motivational goal for social cohesion and collective security (RWA). Extending previous longitudinal research, this study indicates that the effect of personality on ideology is unidirectional, as RWA and SDO did not predict reciprocal prospective change in broad-bandwidth personality. These findings are consistent with a model in which relatively stable broad-bandwidth personality traits shape ideological attitudes over even relatively short time periods, and not the reverse.     

Effects of Dangerous and Competitive Worldviews on Right-Wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation over a Five-Month Period

The cross-lagged effects of dangerous and competitive social worldviews on Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) were examined over a five-month period ( N   =  165). Analyses indicated that the motivational goal for group-based dominance and superiority indexed by SDO changed as a function of the degree to which the social world was perceived as a competitive place characterized by inequality and resource scarcity. The motivational goal for ingroup conformity and collective security indexed by RWA, in contrast, changed as a function of the degree to which the social world was perceived as a dangerous and threatening place prone to high levels of crime and immoral behavior. These findings are consistent with the causal pathways between social worldviews and ideological attitudes predicted by Duckitt's (2001 ) model of the dual motivational and cognitive processes underlying prejudice. An unexpected reciprocal effect in which RWA predicted longitudinal change in dangerous worldview was also identified, suggesting that the relationship between these two constructs may be more complex than previously hypothesized.     

The personality bases of ideology: a one-year longitudinal study

The cross-lagged effects of the Big-Five personality dimensions on Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) and Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) were examined over 1 year (N = 112). Consistent with the Dual Process Cognitive-Motivational Model, SDO and RWA exhibited markedly different personality bases. Low Agreeableness and unexpectedly high Extraversion predicted change in the motivational goal for group-based dominance and superiority (SDO), whereas Openness to Experience predicted change in the motivational goal for social cohesion and collective security (RWA). Neuroticism and Conscientiousness did not predict change in SDO or RWA over time. These findings extend previous cross-sectional (correlational) research and indicate that key dimensions of personality (primarily Agreeableness and Openness to Experience) are an important temporal antecedent of the group-based motivational goals underlying individual differences in prejudice.     

The Personality Bases of Ideology: A One-Year Longitudinal Study

ABSTRACT

The cross-lagged effects of the Big-Five personality dimensions on Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) and Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) were examined over 1 year (N = 112). Consistent with the Dual Process Cognitive-Motivational Model, SDO and RWA exhibited markedly different personality bases. Low Agreeableness and unexpectedly high Extraversion predicted change in the motivational goal for group-based dominance and superiority (SDO), whereas Openness to Experience predicted change in the motivational goal for social cohesion and collective security (RWA). Neuroticism and Conscientiousness did not predict change in SDO or RWA over time. These findings extend previous cross-sectional (correlational) research and indicate that key dimensions of personality (primarily Agreeableness and Openness to Experience) are an important temporal antecedent of the group-based motivational goals underlying individual differences in prejudice.     

Social Representations of History and the Legitimation of Social Inequality: The Causes and Consequences of Historical Negation1

The stories of history tend to favor dominant groups. Two longitudinal studies indicated that ideologies negating historical injustice experienced by Māori (the indigenous peoples of New Zealand) predicted increased opposition toward social policies promoting material reparation among New Zealand European undergraduates. Historical negation was, in turn, predicted by right‐wing authoritarianism (Study 2). These findings suggest that the authoritarian motivation to protect the positive history of the in‐group causes New Zealand Europeans to actively position historical injustices performed by earlier colonial generations as irrelevant. Positioning history in this fashion has important consequences for the mobilization of political attitudes and, in particular, opposition toward social and political policies relating to the distribution of resources and status within society.     

Right wing authoritarianism,social dominance orientation and the dimensions of generalized prejudice

Prior research suggests that individuals' prejudiced attitudes form a single generalized dimension predicted by Right Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). A dual process approach, however, expects different domains of generalized prejudice that relate differentially to RWA and SDO. To test this, 212 participants rated attitudes to 24 typically disliked groups. Factor analysis revealed three distinct generalized prejudice dimensions. Hierarchical Linear Modelling indicated that attitudes towards a ‘dangerous’ groups domain was significantly related only with RWA, attitudes toward a second ‘derogated’ groups domain was related only to SDO, and attitudes toward a third, ‘dissident’ groups, domain was significantly related to both, but powerfully with RWA and weakly with SDO. These findings have implications for explaining and reducing prejudice. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Differential Effects of Right‐Wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation on Dimensions of Generalized Prejudice in Brazil

Previous research within a dual‐process cognitive‐motivational theory of ideology and prejudice has indicated that dimensions of generalized prejudice are structured around attitudes towards dangerous, derogated and dissident groups, and that these prejudice dimensions are differentially predicted by the ideological attitudes of Right‐Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). However, to date, these findings have been restricted to New Zealand samples. We describe two studies examining whether the structure of prejudiced attitudes and the differential prediction by RWA and SDO replicate in the Brazilian context, incorporating context‐relevant examples of each group—politicians, those from the northeast region of Brazil, and environmentalists. Results broadly supported the three‐factor structure of dangerous, derogated, and dissident groups. Consistent with previous research, regression and structural equation analyses showed that RWA explained prejudice against dangerous groups, SDO explained prejudice against derogated groups, and both RWA and SDO explained prejudice against dissident groups. This research provides some evidence for the generalizability of the three‐dimensional structure of generalized prejudice and differential prediction by RWA and SDO. Copyright © 2014 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。     

Invariance of a two-factor model of Social Dominance Orientation across gender

This research examined the measurement and structural invariance of the 16-item Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) scale across gender. The Social Dominance Theory (SDT) invariance hypothesis proposes that men are higher than women in SDO. Tests of this hypothesis have compared summary scores with t-tests, but there is no psychometric work of measurement invariance across gender, which makes interpretation of t-test comparisons problematic. Some research suggests the scale captures two distinct factors: support for group-based dominance (GBD) and general opposition to equality (OEQ). However, gender differences in GBD and OEQ have mixed findings. Results replicated the two-factor structure. Multiple-group CFA indicated that loadings, intercepts, factor variances, and factor covariance are equivalent across gender. Males demonstrated higher latent means of GBD and OEQ, supporting the SDT invariance hypothesis.     

Not in My Backyard! Authoritarianism,Social Dominance Orientation,and Support for Strict Immigration Policies at Home and Abroad

Many controversial immigration policies have recently emerged across the United States and abroad. We explore the role of national context in shaping support for such policies. Specifically, we examine whether the extent to which ideological attitudes—Right‐Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO)—predict policy support is moderated by the national context of the policy. Across three studies, United States citizens read about a controversial immigration policy affecting either their own country (United States) or a foreign country (Israel or Singapore) and indicated their support for the policy. Results reveal that SDO predicts policy support, regardless of its national context; this effect is mediated by perceived competition. Conversely, RWA predicts policy support only if the policy affects domestic immigration; this effect is mediated by perceptions of cultural threat. Consistent with prior research, the present findings highlight the role of perceived cultural threat to one's ingroup and perceived competition in shaping attitudes toward immigration and shed light on some of the motivations underlying the recent rise in popularity of strict immigration policies.     

Differential effects of right wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation on outgroup attitudes and their mediation by threat from and competitiveness to outgroups

A dual-process model of individual differences in prejudice proneness proposes that Right Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) will influence prejudice against particular outgroups through different motivational mechanisms. RWA should cause negative attitudes toward groups seen as threatening social control, order, cohesion, and stability, such as deviant groups, and negativity toward these groups should be mediated through perceived threat from them. SDO should cause negative attitudes toward groups that activate competitiveness over relative dominance and superiority, such as socially subordinate groups low in power and status, and negativity toward these groups should be mediated through competitiveness toward them. Findings from four student samples that assessed attitudes toward seven social groups selected as likely to vary systematically in social threat and social subordination supported these predictions. The findings have implications for reconciling intergroup and individual difference explanations of prejudice and for interventions to reduce prejudice.     

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 intervening role of social worldviews in the relationship between the five‐factor model of personality and social attitudes

The present research investigates in a student (N = 183) and a voter sample (N = 276) whether the relationships between the Five‐Factor Model (FFM) personality dimensions and social attitudes (i.e. Right‐Wing Authoritarianism [RWA] and Social Dominance Orientation [SDO]) are mediated by social worldviews (i.e. dangerous and jungle worldviews). Two important results were obtained. First, the perception of the world as inherently dangerous and chaotic partially mediated the relationships of the personality dimensions Openness and Neuroticism and the social attitude RWA. Second, the jungle worldview completely mediated the relationships between Agreeableness and SDO, but considerable item overlap between the jungle worldview and SDO was also noted. It was further revealed that acquiescence response set and item overlap had an impact on social worldviews and attitudes, but that their relationships were hardly affected by these biases. The discussion focuses on the status of social worldviews to explain social attitudes. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Values,ideological attitudes and patriotism

We tested a series of discriminant associations, investigating how dimensions of patriotism (i.e. blind and constructive) differently relate to value orientations, and to ideological attitudes such as Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). Using an Italian student sample (N = 146) we found that blind patriotism correlated positively with tradition and negatively with universalism, whilst constructive patriotism correlated negatively with tradition and positively with universalism. Both RWA and SDO correlated negatively with universalism, whilst only RWA was associated with security and tradition and only SDO related positively to power and self-direction. Mediation analyses revealed that most of the effects of value orientations on patriotism were mediated by SDO and RWA.     

The Dual Process Model of Ideology and Prejudice: A Longitudinal Test During a Global Recession

ABSTRACT

This study tested the pathways between personality, social worldviews, and ideology, predicted by the Dual Process Model (DPM) of ideology and prejudice. These paths were tested using a full cross-lagged panel design administered to a New Zealand community sample in early 2008 (before the effects of the global financial crisis reached New Zealand) and again in 2009 (when the crisis was near its peak; n?=?247). As hypothesized, low openness to experience predicted residualized change in dangerous worldview, which in turn predicted right-wing authoritarianism (RWA). Low agreeableness predicted competitive worldview, which in turn predicted social dominance orientation (SDO). RWA and SDO also exerted unexpected reciprocal effects on worldviews. This study provides the most comprehensive longitudinal test of the DPM to date, and was conducted during a period of systemic instability when the causal effects predicted by the DPM should be, and were, readily apparent.     

Human values and ideological beliefs as predictors of attitudes toward immigrants across 20 countries: The country-level moderating role of threat

Immigration is a worldwide subject of interest, and studies about attitudes toward immigrants have been frequent due to immigration crises in different locations across the globe. We aimed at understanding individual-level effects of human values and ideological beliefs (Right-Wing Authoritarianism—RWA, and Social Dominance Orientation—SDO) on attitudes toward immigrants, and whether country-level variables (perception of Islamic fundamentalism as a threat, perception of immigrants as a threat, and international migrant stock) moderate these relations. With representative samples from 20 countries (N = 21,362; the Americas, Europe, Asia, and Oceania), and using Multilevel Bayesian regressions, results showed the negative effect of RWA, SDO, and existence values on attitudes toward immigrants, and the positive effects of suprapersonal and interactive values. Cross-level interactions indicated that the effects of RWA, SDO, and suprapersonal and existence values were intensified in countries with societally high levels of perceiving Islamic fundamentalism as a threat. International migrant stock served as a country-level moderator for the effects of SDO and RWA only. When country-level moderators were included simultaneously, Islamic fundamentalism as a threat was the most consistent moderator. Framing theory is offered as a plausible explanation of these results.     

Social dominance orientation: Cause or ‘mere effect’?: Evidence for SDO as a causal predictor of prejudice and discrimination against ethnic and racial outgroups

The question of whether SDO is a cause or mere effect of intergroup attitudes and behaviors has been the subject of heated debate. Much of the research brought to bear on the question, however, has used cross-sectional data that is not best-suited for making causal inferences. Using data from a panel study that tracked UCLA undergraduates over several years, we find support for the notion that SDO is a cause, rather than ‘mere reflection’ of prejudice and discrimination against outgroups. Specifically, using cross-lagged analyses among White students, we show that SDO measured in 1996 has significant marginal utility for predicting prejudice against a series of ethnic outgroups, as well as self-reported ingroup friendship preference, four years later, controlling for their 1996 levels. Conversely, outgroup affect and ingroup friendship preference measured in 1996 fail to predict SDO levels in 2000 once 1996 SDO levels are taken into account. Implications of these analyses for the debate on the interpretation of SDO as a relatively stable orientation towards group-based hierarchy in society are discussed.