Social dominance orientation and climate change denial: The role of dominance and system justification |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Department of Developmental, Personality and Social Psychology, Ghent University, Henri Dunantlaan 2, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium;2. Department of Psychology, Brock University, 500 Glenridge Ave., St. Catharines, Ontario L2S 3A1, Canada;1. University of Bristol, United Kingdom;2. University of Western Australia, Australia;3. Harvard University, United States;4. CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia;5. University of New South Wales, Australia;6. Australian National University, Australia;1. Geography, University of Exeter, Amory Building, Rennes Drive, Exeter EX4 4RJ, UK;2. CSIRO, Brisbane, Australia;1. Massey University, New Zealand;2. University of Innsbruck, Austria;3. University of the Basque Country, Spain;4. Universidad Andrés Bello, Chile;5. Nanjing Normal University, China;1. Department of Developmental, Personality and Social Psychology, Ghent University, Belgium;2. Department of Psychology, Brock University, Canada;3. School of English and Liberal Studies, Seneca College of Applied Arts and Technology, Canada |
| |
| Abstract: | Extending previous research, we examined whether the relation between social dominance orientation (SDO) and climate change denial reflects group-based dominance (SDO and nature dominance) or general system justification. Moreover, we examined whether the relation between personality (domineering and empathy) and denial is mediated by group-based dominance variables. The results showed that the group-based dominance variables reduce the effect of system justification on denial to nonsignificant. Also, social dominance and nature dominance explain unique parts of the variance in denial. Moreover, path analyses showed that the relations between empathy and system justification with denial are mediated by both of the group-based dominance variables, while the relation between domineering and denial is mediated only by SDO. Together, these results suggest that denial is driven partly by dominant personality and low empathy, and partly by motivation to justify and promote existing social and human-nature hierarchies. We conclude by suggesting that climate change mitigation efforts could be more successful if framed as being clearly beneficial for everybody and nonthreatening to existing social order. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
