We will hunt them down: How social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism fuel ethnic persecution of immigrants in fundamentally different ways

Despite the fact that SDO and RWA are correlated with one another and both predict support for ethnic persecution of immigrants, it is argued that this aggression is provoked for very different reasons. For authoritarians, outgroup aggression against immigrants should primarily be provoked by immigrant refusal to assimilate into the dominant culture because this violates ingroup conformity. In contrast, SDO should be associated with aggression against immigrants who do assimilate into the dominant culture because this blurs existing status boundaries between groups. Using samples of American and Swiss college students, the data were consistent with this status boundary enforcement hypothesis regarding social dominators and largely consistent with the ingroup conformity hypothesis regarding authoritarians. National and ethnic identification did not account for these results. The results further support the argument that outgroup prejudice and discrimination is most fruitfully seen as an interactive function of individual differences and situational constraints.     

儿童社交问题解决与其社交地位关系的初步研究

本研究初步考察了小学儿童的社交问题解决与其社交地位的关系。采用访谈法研究了小学儿童在发动交往、维持交往和解决冲突三种情境中的社交问题解决。结果发现,不同社交地位的儿童对社交目标的选择并无显著差别;而在发动交往时,被拒绝儿童更倾向于借助他人帮助。被忽视和被拒绝儿童比正常儿童更少选择言语沟通和解释策略。被忽视儿童发动交往的有效性低于其他儿童,被拒绝儿童解决冲突的适当性低于受欢迎儿童和一般型儿童。     

The social context of trust: The role of status

The current paper examines how status, a universal feature of organizational life, affects people’s initial trust in others. In three experiments – which employ a range of status manipulations and trust measures – we consistently observed that the possession of high status led individuals to trust others more. In addition, our results help shed light on why this occurs. Namely, mediation analyses illustrated that having status alters how we perceive others intentions, such that the belief that others have positive intentions toward us (i.e., benevolence) accounted for the relationship between status and trust. These findings contribute both to our knowledge of the contextual features which impact trust and provide insight into the psychological consequences of status.     

“Benevolent Patriarchy”: Palestinian Women between “Ideal” and “Reality”

In this article polygyny is used to illustrate how the ideal of benevolent patriarchy and the “good” Muslim man as the benevolent patriarch tends to create a discrepancy between the legal and the moral in Islamic legislation as well as in Islamic discourse. The study is based on fieldwork in the West Bank in 2011 when 49 Islamist and Islamic-oriented women were interviewed. The main finding of this study is that Islamist women tend to accept the Islamic gender system as the divine will, and they also accept its legal expression, Personal Status Law. However, there is a little awareness of the lack of legal consequences for men who do not behave according to the moral code, which is not explicitly but only implicitly assumed in the law.     

Image theory and career aspirations: Indirect and interactive effects of status-related variables

The present study applied Image Theory (Beach, 1990) to test how different components of a person's value image (i.e., perceived social status identity and conformity to masculine and feminine gender role norms) interact to influence trajectories toward high career aspirations (i.e., high value for status in one's work and aspirations for advancement and achievement in one's career). Results from 224 undergraduate students demonstrated that value for status in work mediated the relationship between perceived social status and career aspirations. Conformity to feminine, but not masculine, gender role norms moderated the relationship between perceived status and value for status in work. Conformity to feminine norms also moderated the indirect relationship between perceived status and aspirations via value for status in work, yielding a pattern of moderated mediation.     

Holding your place: Reactions to the prospect of status gains and losses

This paper examines individuals’ reactions to the prospect of gaining or losing status in groups. The results of three experiments provide evidence that individuals attach greater value to status when recalling the risk of status loss than when recalling the potential for status gain (Experiment 1), are willing to pay more to avoid a status loss than to achieve a status gain (Experiment 1), and put forth greater effort when striving to prevent status loss than when striving to gain status (Experiment 2). Finally, individuals who risk losing status allocate more resources toward personal status concerns (and away from group interests and potential monetary gain) than do individuals who have a chance of gaining status (Experiment 3). We discuss the implications of this research both in terms of individuals’ psychological experience of their status, as well as status attainment and maintenance concerns in groups.     

Decision making and testosterone: When the ends justify the means

Behavioral endocrinology research suggests that testosterone may play a role in moral decision making. Studies involving human and nonhuman animals indicate that high basal testosterone is associated with decreased aversion to risk and an increased threshold for conflict, fear, stress, and threat. We tested the role of testosterone in moral decision making. We predicted and found that individuals high in testosterone are more likely to make utilitarian decisions—specifically when doing so involves acts of aggression and social cost.     

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.     

Protecting the self through consumption: Status goods as affirmational commodities

Individuals conspicuously consume to signal their wealth. As a variant to this economic explanation, four studies explored individual’s psychological need for self-integrity as a potential motivating force for these consumption decisions. Relying on both field and experimental studies, and employing multiple instantiations of high-status goods and self-threat, we demonstrate that individuals consume status-infused products for their reparative effects on the ego. Individuals under self-threat sought ownership of high-status goods to nurse their psychological wounds (Study 1), and when afforded an alternate route to repair their self-integrity, sought these products less (Study 2). Furthermore, among a representative sample of US consumers, low-income individuals’ lowered self-esteem drove their willingness to spend on high-status goods (Study 3). Finally, these high-status goods serve the purpose of shielding an individual’s ego from future self-threats (Study 4). The compensatory role of high-status goods has important implications for consumer decision-making and public policies aimed at reducing consumer debt.     

Disciplinary sanctioning of students with intellectual disabilities: revisiting the status liability hypothesis

We examined the impact of disability status on disciplinary sanctioning of a student committing a minor versus severe behavioral infraction. We used the status liability hypothesis as a framework. This hypothesis suggests that individuals with a higher personal status receive sanctioning differentially based on the severity of offense. Specifically, individuals of high status are predicted to be sanctioned less severely than persons with lower status given a minor offense. The hypothesis also predicts that individuals accorded high status will receive more punitive sanctioning when the act of deviance from social norms is perceived as severe. Pre-service teachers were randomly assigned to judge the behavior of a student with or without an intellectual disability committing a behavioral offense. A student with an intellectual disability was seen as influenced by dispositional factors, regardless of the offense, while a student without a disability who committed a minor offense was seen as influenced by situational factors. The behavior of a student with an intellectual disability was judged as less severe, and the student was 50% less likely to incur an in-school suspension. When a student with an intellectual disability was sanctioned, the length of suspension was equal to that of a student without a disability.