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.     

Bullying as strategic behavior: relations with desired and acquired dominance in the peer group

To examine whether bullying is strategic behavior aimed at obtaining or maintaining social dominance, 1129 9- to 12-year-old Dutch children were classified in terms of their role in bullying and in terms of their use of dominance oriented coercive and prosocial social strategies. Multi-informant measures of participants’ acquired and desired social dominance were also included. Unlike non-bullying children, children contributing to bullying often were bistrategics in that they used both coercive and prosocial strategies and they also were socially dominant. Ringleader bullies also expressed a higher desire to be dominant. Among non-bullying children, those who tended to help victims were relatively socially dominant but victims and outsiders were not. Generally, the data supported the claim that bullying is dominance-oriented strategic behavior, which suggests that intervention strategies are more likely to be successful when they take the functional aspects of bullying behavior into account.     

Behavioral and social cognitive processes in preschool children's social dominance

This longitudinal, naturalistic study addressed behavioral and social cognitive processes implicated in preschool children's social dominance. In the first objective, we examined the degree to which peer aggression, affiliation, and postaggression reconciliation predicted social dominance across a school year. Consistent with predictions, all three predicted dominance early in the year while only affiliation predicted dominance later in the year, suggesting that aggression, affiliation, and reconciliation were used to establish social dominance where affiliation was used to maintain it. In the second, exploratory, objective we tested the relative importance of social dominance and reconciliation (the Machiavellian and Vygotskian intelligence hypotheses, respectively) in predicting theory of mind/false belief. Results indicated that social dominance accounted for significant variance, beyond that related to reconciliation and affiliation, in predicting theory of mind/false belief status. Results are discussed in terms of specific behavioral and social cognitive processes employed in establishing and maintaining social dominance.     

The money attitude of covert and overt narcissists

The money attitude of covert and overt narcissists was studied. Both covert and overt narcissism predicted the power-prestige dimension of money attitude, which were both mediated by the need for social power. Interestingly, the relationship for covert narcissism was also mediated by the fear of negative social evaluation, confirming its socially vulnerable and hypersensitive features. In addition, the anxiety and distrust factors of money attitude were correlated with covert narcissism only. Anxiety was explained by the need for power and avoidance motivation, but no significant mediator was found for distrust. These findings provide evidence to the similarities and differences between the two types of narcissism. They also shed light on narcissists’ money-related behaviors, such as investment strategy and consumer behaviors.     

Age-related changes in visual pseudoneglect

Pseudoneglect is a slight but consistent leftward attentional bias commonly observed in healthy young populations, purportedly explained by right hemispheric dominance. It has been suggested that normal aging might be associated with a decline of the right hemisphere. According to this hypothesis, a few studies have shown that elderly tend to exhibit a rightward attentional bias in line bisection. In the present study, we tested this hypothesis in young and older participants using a perceptual landmark task. Results yield evidence for an age-related shift, from a strong attentional leftward bias in young adults toward a suppressed or even a reversed bias in the elderly. Right hemisphere impairment coupled to a left hemispheric compensation might explain the perceptual shift observed in older adults. However, a decline in corpus callosum function cannot be excluded. Alternatively, these results may be in agreement with the hypothesis of an age-related specific inhibition of return dysfunction, an overt attentional orienting mechanism, and/or a decrease of dopamine.     

Perceived Conflict and Leader Dominance: Individual and Contextual Factors Behind Preferences for Dominant Leaders

Recent research finds that political candidates and leaders with dominant, masculine physical features are more preferred under conditions of conflict than of cooperation. Importantly, however, methodological limitations of past research have hindered the identification of whether this effect reflects that voters intuitively view (1) dominant leaders as more competent in solving problems of conflict, (2) nondominant leaders as more competent in solving problems of cooperation, or (3) both. In this article, we utilize recent advances in evolutionary psychology to form precise predictions on the nature of the underlying psychology and employ an unprecedented array of data types—including highly controlled experiments, natural experiments, and behavioral measures—to investigate the validity of these predictions. Using large approximately nationally representative surveys of 2,009 Poles and Ukrainians fielded during the Crimea crisis in 2014, we find that preferences for leader dominance are exclusively driven by the intuition that dominant leaders are better able to facilitate aggressive responses during social conflict and that these preferences are regulated by contextual conditions and individual predispositions related to such responses.     

Mechanisms of moral disengagement and their differential use by right‐wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation in support of war

Right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) are associated with the approval of war as a political intervention [McFarland, 2005]. We examined whether the effects of RWA and SDO on war support are mediated by moral‐disengagement mechanisms [i.e., responsibility reduction, moral justification, minimizing consequences, and dehumanizing–blaming victims; Bandura, 1999] and whether the ideologies use the mechanisms differently. Our data were consistent with the possibility that minimizing consequences (Study 1) and moral justification (Study 2) mediate the effects of RWA and SDO on approval of war. Both ideologies were positively associated with all moral‐disengagement mechanism though more strongly so for RWA. Comparisons within ideologies suggest that RWA was most strongly associated with moral justification and SDO was most strongly associated with dehumanizing–blaming victims. We discuss implications and limitations. Aggr. Behav. 36:238–250, 2010. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

A bias-corrected exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of right-wing authoritarianism: Support for a three-factor structure

The factor structure of right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) remains a contentious issue. Although designed to measure three underlying attitude clusters, aggression, submission and conventionalism, many items are deliberately double- or triple-barrelled, to capture the covariation of the three clusters in a unidimensional scale. Additionally, although the scale is balanced, there is an item wording direction bias in the clusters; aggression items are pro-trait, and conventionalism items are con-trait. Sub-scale structure is therefore potentially confounded with acquiescence bias. Although RWA as a unitary construct has been an effective tool for exploring prejudice, it would be useful in many cases to measure its underlying components directly. Proposed solutions to this problem include creating short-form scales as subsets of the original scale, or modifying items to simplify and un-confound the structure. We present convergent evidence of an underlying factor structure by considering one-, two- and three-factor solutions to the uncorrected scale and then using an indirect method to correct for acquiescence bias. Before and after correction, factor analysis supported a three-factor solution. Confirmatory factor analyses also support a three-factor solution compared to a one-factor solution.     

Social Dominance Orientation, Authoritarianism, and Support for Intergroup Violence Between the Middle East and America

Social dominance theory has generally posited that terror and intergroup violence can be explained in terms of social dominance struggles. Social dominance theorists have described terror mostly as a tool for maintaining intergroup hierarchies in society (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Although implications of the theory suggest that terror may also be used by lower status groups as a tool for the resistance of domination by higher status groups, this prediction heretofore has not been empirically demonstrated. Data from two samples, one in the United States and one in Lebanon, were collected regarding attitudes toward terrorism and intergroup violence. The results show that the American sample demonstrates the typical patterns of social dominance such that those who are higher in social dominance orientation tend to support greater violence toward the Middle East. However, the Lebanese sample shows the opposite pattern, such that those who are lower in social dominance orientation tend to support violence toward the West. These results suggest that (1) support for terrorism among Middle East citizens is a project of counterdominance, and, more broadly, that (2) the relationship between social dominance orientation and support for violence depends on the dynamics of the conflict and the status of the perpetrators.