Does social dominance generate prejudice? Integrating individual and contextual determinants of intergroup cognitions

Social dominance orientation (SDO) has been proposed as an important variable in the explanation of prejudice. We distinguish between three conceptualizations of SDO: SDO as a personality trait (personality model), SDO as a moderator of the effects of situational variables (Person x Situation model), and SDO as a mediator of the effect of social position on prejudice (group socialization model [GSM]). Four studies (N = 1.657) looking at the relations between social positions, SDO, and prejudice in a natural setting and in a laboratory setting provide strong support for the GSM. In contrast to previous correlational findings, there is evidence of a cause (dominant social position), an effect (prejudice increases), and a mediator (SDO). These results suggest new perspectives on the integration of individual and contextual determinants of prejudice.     

Towards a theory of collective phenomena. III: Conflicts and forms of power

This paper further develops a new theory of power advanced by the authors in two previous papers (Galam and Moscovici, 1991, 1994). According to this theory power results from the build up of conflicts within a group, these conflicts requiring a degree of organizational complexity which is itselfa decreasing function of group size. Within this approach, power appears to be a composite of three qualitatively different powers, institutional, generative and ecological. Levels and relationships among these forms of power are considered as a function of the diversity of the group. There exist also three states of organization associated with power evolution. At the group initial stage is the paradigmatic state. Creation and inclusion of conflicts are accomplished in the transitional state through the building of complexity. At a critical value of diversity, the group moves into the agonal state in which institutional power vanishes simultaneously with the fusion of generative and ecological powers.     

Contrary effects of group cohesiveness in minority influence: Intergroup categorization of the source and levels of influence

The roles of group cohesiveness and intergroup categorization of the source in minority influence were studied in a 2 (high versus low cohesiveness) × 2 (ingroup versus outgroup source) × 3 (phases) factorial design. Six subjects forming a group were confronted with a confederate defending a minority position in a perceptual task. The results indicated a manifest influence effect (slide colour), accompanied by a latent polarization (afterimage) in the high cohesrveness/outgroup source condition, and a latent unfluence effect in the low cohesiveness/ingroup source condition.     

Two-stage model of visual backward masking: Sensory transmission and accrual of effective information as a function of target intensity and similarity

A functional model is used to describe the effect of target intensity and target-set similarity on backward visual masking. The model consists of two distinct stages of visual information processing. The first stage is related to sensory transduction and transmission and is assumed to require a finite and measurable amount of time during which performance-remains at chance. The second stage, associated with central processing, is characterized by a negatively accelerated growth function reflecting the accrual of effective information. Results show that the duration of the transmission stage is inversely related to target intensity. Surprisingly, the rate of information accrual is an interactive function of both target intensity and target-set similarity. The pattern of results is consistent with the interpretation that both intensity and similarity mediate their effect through a common mechanism—the accrual of effective information.     

Short versus long term gains of a cognitive-behavioral social skills program targeting the giving and receiving of criticism

Seventy-four university undergraduates (40.2% male and 59.8% female) reporting difficulty in giving and receiving criticism were randomly assigned to either a training group consisting of cognitive behavioral criticism skills including behavior rehearsal, modeling, coaching, cognitive restructuring, or to a control group. Dependent measures were given at pre-test, post-test, and one year follow-up. Included were self-report measures consisting of Fear of Negative Evaluation (FNE), Criticism Concerns Scale (CCS), Criticism Self-Esteem Giving and Receiving Scales, and behavioral role-play measures consisting of judges’ global ratings of subject’s verbal and nonverbal criticism behaviors in role-play scenarios with a live actor. Results for the self-report measures, FNE, and Criticism Self-Esteem Receiving showed both training program and control groups improved at post-test, but only the training program group maintained gains at one year follow-up. For the CCS and Criticism Self-Esteem Giving, the training program group improved over time, yet was only significantly different from control group at post-test. Results were discussed in terms of the pro-active nature of giving criticism versus the more reactive nature of receiving criticism.     

The Political Socialization of Commerce and Social Science Students: Epistemic Authority and Attitude Change1

A 3-year longitudinal study assessed the effects of studying in the social sciences versus commerce on sociopolitical orientation. Results reveal field-specific changes in attitudes. Commerce students (n= 34) became, over time, more favorable toward “capitalists,” less favorable toward “unions,” and less likely to attribute poverty and unemployment to systemic factors. In contrast, social science students (n= 57) maintained liberal attitudes and became less likely to attribute poverty and unemployment to internal dispositions. Beliefs about internal and external causes of poverty and unemployment, while unrelated in 1st year, become negatively related in 3rd year but only among social science students. Measures taken in 3rd year to assess the influence of peers, professors, and courses suggest that peers have a generally conservative effect, even in the social sciences, while professors and courses have a liberal effect only in the social sciences.     

Studies in group decision I: Social space,patterns of communication and group concensus

The discovery of the effects of risky shift focusses the interest on the study of decision processes. Nevertheless the researches carried on until now have always shown confusion between the theoretical and experimental analysis of these processes and the risk-related behavior. In the first part of the article the authors try to clear this confusion as well as to define the conditions of a systematic study of the mechanisms of decision leading either to an averaging or to a polarization of individual views. The authors insist on the necessity to compare groups rather than individuals to groups. To start with, one hypothesis concerning the effects of group organization on the degree of polarization of views is proposed. The experiment described in the second part of the article confirms the hypothesis: A group in which individuals have the possibility to communicate with each other and to interact directly take more extreme decisions than a group deprived of this possibility. It is presumptuous and inexact to state that groups take more extreme risk than individuals whereas it is right to say that certain groups take risks when circumstances are favorable.