On Post–Apocalyptic and Doomsday Prepping Beliefs: A New Measure, Its Correlates, and the Motivation to Prep

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 506-525 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam K. Fetterman ◽  
Bastiaan T. Rutjens ◽  
Florian Landkammer ◽  
Benjamin M. Wilkowski
Keyword(s):  
Social Dominance ◽  
European Association ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Projective Test ◽  
Television Shows ◽  
Societal Relevance ◽  
Political Events ◽  
Popular Television ◽  
Do So

Post–apocalyptic scenarios provide the basis for popular television shows, video games, and books. These scenarios may be popular because people have their own beliefs and visions about the apocalypse and the need to prepare. The prevalence of such beliefs might also hold societal relevance and serve as a type of projective test of personality. However, there are no quantitative accounts of post–apocalyptic or prepping beliefs. As such, we conducted seven studies ( Ntotal = 1034) to do so. In Studies 1 and 2, we developed a post–apocalyptic and prepping beliefs scale, explored its correlates, and confirmed its structure and psychometric properties. In Study 3, we attempted to activate a ‘prepper’ mindset and further explore the correlates of the new scale. In Studies 4 and 5, we investigated covariations in daily feelings, thoughts, and events, and prepping beliefs. In Studies 6a and 6b, we compared scores from ‘real’ preppers and to a non–prepping group. Overall, we found that post–apocalyptic concerns and prepping beliefs are predictive of low agreeableness and humility, paranoia, cynicism, conspiracy mentality, conservatism, and social dominance orientation. We also found that increased belief in the need to prep is associated with God–belief, negative daily experiences, and global political events. © 2019 European Association of Personality Psychology

Dimensions of Social Dominance Orientation: The Roles of Legitimizing Myths and National Identification

2014 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 538-549 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Hindriks ◽  
Maykel Verkuyten ◽  
Marcel Coenders
Keyword(s):  
Social Dominance ◽  
Representative Sample ◽  
European Association ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Two Dimensions ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Ethnic Prejudice ◽  
National Identification

Using a representative sample of Dutch natives, the current study examined the distinction between two dimensions of social dominance orientation [SDO–Dominance (SDO–D) and SDO–Egalitarianism (SDO–E)] and their relation with prejudice towards immigrant groups. Results showed that an empirical distinction between the two dimensions could be made. Furthermore, the relation between SDO and prejudice was fully mediated by hierarchy–enhancing (ethnic citizenship, assimilation) and hierarchy–attenuating myths (civic citizenship, multiculturalism), but in different ways for both SDO dimensions. Moreover, there were distinct paths between the SDO dimensions and ethnic prejudice for higher and lower identifiers. For higher identifiers, the relation between SDO–D and prejudice was fully mediated by the endorsement of hierarchy–enhancing myths. For lower identifiers, there was an association between SDO–E and prejudice that was predominantly mediated by the endorsement of hierarchy–attenuating myths. Copyright © 2014 European Association of Personality Psychology

The Suppression and Justification of Prejudice as A Function of Political Orientation

2014 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Russell J. Webster ◽  
Mason D. Burns ◽  
Margot Pickering ◽  
Donald A. Saucier
Keyword(s):  
Gay Men ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
European Association ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Political Orientation ◽  
The Political ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Right Wing Authoritarianism ◽  
The Relationship

Politically conservative (versus liberal) individuals generally report more prejudice towards various low–status out–groups. Three studies examined whether prejudice suppression factors—specifically, internal and external motivation to suppress (IMS and EMS, respectively) prejudice—can help explain the relationship between political orientation and prejudice. Study 1 showed that IMS and EMS partially mediated the relationship between political orientation and affective prejudice towards Arabs. Study 2 demonstrated that when justification [right–wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation] and suppression (IMS and EMS) factors are simultaneously tested as mediators, only RWA partially mediated the relationship between political orientation and prejudice towards deviant (e.g. gay men) out–groups, whereas RWA and IMS fully mediated the relationship between political orientation and prejudice towards derogated out–groups (e.g. Blacks). Intriguingly, IMS rendered social dominance orientation effects non–significant for derogated out–groups. Study 3 showed that anticipating an out–group interaction (with a Black or lesbian confederate) diminished the mediational contribution of IMS in the political orientation–prejudice relationship because of increased IMS among participants; yet the increases in IMS did not completely eliminate differences in prejudice as a function of political orientation. Ultimately, these three studies demonstrate that suppression (in addition to justification) factors do help explain the relationship between political orientation and prejudice. Copyright © 2013 European Association of Personality Psychology.

scholarly journals The Two Dimensions of Narcissistic Personality and Support for the Radical Right: The Role of Right–Wing Authoritarianism, Social Dominance Orientation and Anti–Immigrant Sentiment

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabrina J. Mayer ◽  
Carl C. Berning ◽  
David Johann
Keyword(s):  
Social Dominance ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Two Dimensions ◽  
Radical Right ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Grandiose Narcissism ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Right Wing Authoritarianism ◽  
Radical Right Parties ◽  
Party Support

This paper offers an explanation of the link between grandiose narcissism and support for radical right parties. Drawing on representative data of the GESIS Panel ( N = 2827), focusing on support for the German radical right populist party Alternative for Germany in 2016 and treating grandiose narcissism as a two–dimensional concept, it is shown that the effects of grandiose narcissism are indirect rather than direct. The paper also reveals that it is mainly narcissistic rivalry that accounts for radical right party support, whereas narcissistic admiration has a protecting relationship. Finally, our results indicate that the indirect effects of narcissistic rivalry on radical right party support via right–wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation, respectively, are mediated by anti–immigrant sentiment. All in all, our results suggest that in studies on ideological orientations and voting behaviour, both dimensions of grandiose narcissism should be considered due to their contradictory relationship. Moreover, our findings indicate that the success of radical right parties might be the expression of personality dispositions of some parts of the electorate. © 2020 The Authors. European Journal of Personality published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Association of Personality Psychology

scholarly journals Common Ideological Roots of Speciesism and Generalized Ethnic Prejudice: The Social Dominance Human–Animal Relations Model (SD–HARM)

2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 507-522 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristof Dhont ◽  
Gordon Hodson ◽  
Ana C. Leite
Keyword(s):  
Social Dominance ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Positive Association ◽  
Significant Positive Association ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Ethnic Prejudice ◽  
The Social ◽  
Analytic Integration ◽  
Key Factor ◽  
Human Animal

Recent research and theorizing suggest that desires for group–based dominance underpin biases towards both human outgroups and (non–human) animals. A systematic study of the common ideological roots of human–human and human–animal biases is, however, lacking. Three studies (in Belgium, UK, and USA) tested the Social Dominance Human–Animal Relations Model (SD–HARM) proposing that Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) is a key factor responsible for the significant positive association between ethnic outgroup attitudes and speciesist attitudes towards animals, even after accounting for other ideological variables (that possibly confound previous findings). Confirming our hypotheses, the results consistently demonstrated that SDO, more than right–wing authoritarianism (RWA), is a key factor connecting ethnic prejudice and speciesist attitudes. Furthermore, Studies 2 and 3 showed that both SDO and RWA are significantly related to perceived threat posed by vegetarianism (i.e. ideologies and diets minimizing harm to animals), but with SDO playing a focal role in explaining the positive association between threat perceptions and ethnic prejudice. Study 3 replicated this pattern, additionally including political conservatism in the model, itself a significant correlate of speciesism. Finally, a meta–analytic integration across studies provided robust support for SD–HARM and offers important insights into the psychological parallels between human intergroup and human–animal relations. Copyright © 2016 European Association of Personality Psychology

scholarly journals On Self–Love and Outgroup Hate: Opposite Effects of Narcissism on Prejudice via Social Dominance Orientation and Right–Wing Authoritarianism

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 366-384 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Cichocka ◽  
Kristof Dhont ◽  
Arti P. Makwana ◽  
Mitja Back
Keyword(s):  
Social Dominance ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Big Five Personality ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Negatively Associated ◽  
Right Wing Authoritarianism ◽  
Self Evaluation ◽  
Self Worth ◽  
Ideological Attitudes

Previous research has obtained mixed findings as to whether feelings of self–worth are positively or negatively related to right–wing ideological beliefs and prejudice. We propose to clarify the link between self–worth and ideology by distinguishing between narcissistic and non–narcissistic self–evaluations as well as between different dimensions of ideological attitudes. Four studies, conducted in three different socio–political contexts: the UK (Study 1, N = 422), the US (Studies 2 and 3, Ns = 471 and 289, respectively), and Poland (Study 4, N = 775), investigated the associations between narcissistic and non–narcissistic self–evaluations, social dominance orientation (SDO), right–wing authoritarianism (RWA), and ethnic prejudice. Confirming our hypotheses, the results consistently showed that after controlling for self–esteem, narcissistic self–evaluation was positively associated with SDO (accounting for RWA), yet negatively associated with RWA (accounting for SDO). These associations were similar after controlling for psychopathy and Machiavellianism (Study 3) as well as collective narcissism and Big Five personality characteristics (Study 4). Studies 2–4 additionally demonstrated that narcissistic self–evaluation was indirectly positively associated with prejudice through higher SDO (free of RWA) but indirectly negatively associated with prejudice through lower RWA (free of SDO). Implications for understanding the role of self–evaluation in right–wing ideological attitudes and prejudice are discussed. Copyright © 2017 The Authors. European Journal of Personality published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Association of Personality Psychology

The Core of Darkness: Uncovering the Heart of the Dark Triad

2013 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 521-531 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Nelson Jones ◽  
Aurelio Jose Figueredo
Keyword(s):  
Common Core ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Latent Variable ◽  
Structural Equation ◽  
Structural Equation Models ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Dark Triad ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Personality Variables ◽  
The Common

The Dark Triad consists of three overlapping but distinct personality variables: narcissism, Machiavellianism and psychopathy. To date, however, no research has empirically identified what leads these three variables to overlap or whether other variables share the same core. The present research addresses why and how dark personalities overlap. Drawing from classic work in psychopathy, Hare's Factor 1 or manipulation and callousness were found to be the common antagonistic core. A series of latent variable procedures, including Multisample Structural Equation Models, revealed that for both samples, manipulation and callousness, completely accounted for the associations among the facet scores of the psychopathy, narcissism and Machiavellianism scales. Sample 2 also included Social Dominance Orientation, and results further confirmed that Social Dominance Orientation has the same common core as the Dark Triad. In sum, Hare's Factor 1—manipulation–callousness—emerged as common dark core that accounts for the overlap among antagonistic traits. Copyright © 2012 European Association of Personality Psychology

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

2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clara Cantal ◽  
Taciano L. Milfont ◽  
Marc S. Wilson ◽  
Valdiney V. Gouveia
Keyword(s):  
Social Dominance ◽  
Structural Equation ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Dual Process ◽  
Dimensional Structure ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Differential Prediction ◽  
Right Wing Authoritarianism

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

The Structure and Sources of Right–wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation

2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 406-420 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Kandler ◽  
Edward Bell ◽  
Rainer Riemann
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Error Variance ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Right Wing Authoritarianism ◽  
Genetic And Environmental Factors ◽  
Genetic Contributions ◽  
Peer Reports

Right–wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) are widely used constructs in research on social and political attitudes. This study examined their hierarchical and correlative structure (across sexes, generations and rater perspectives), as well as how genetic and environmental factors may contribute to individual differences in them (using different rater perspectives and nuclear twin family data). We found a substantive common aspect (beyond shared artificial variance arising from socially desirable responding) underlying both RWA and SDO: aggression against subordinate groups. We discussed how this aspect could help to explain the commonly reported correlation between the two concepts in Western countries. Estimates of genetic and environmental components in RWA and SDO based on self–reports were quite comparable with those based on peer reports. When controlling for error variance and taking assortative mating into account, individual differences in RWA were primarily due to genetic contributions including genotype–environment correlation, whereas variance in SDO was largely attributable to environmental sources shared and not shared by twins. The findings are discussed in terms of the utility of RWA and SDO as basic constructs to describe individual differences in social attitudes and with respect to the different patterns of genetic and environmental influences that underlie them. Copyright © 2016 European Association of Personality Psychology

Exploring the Multidimensional Facets of Authoritarianism: Authoritarian Aggression and Social Dominance Orientation

2008 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefano Passini
Keyword(s):  
Social Dominance ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Model Fit ◽  
Regression Analyses ◽  
One Dimensional ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
The One ◽  
Better Than

The relation between authoritarianism and social dominance orientation was analyzed, with authoritarianism measured using a three-dimensional scale. The implicit multidimensional structure (authoritarian submission, conventionalism, authoritarian aggression) of Altemeyer’s (1981, 1988) conceptualization of authoritarianism is inconsistent with its one-dimensional methodological operationalization. The dimensionality of authoritarianism was investigated using confirmatory factor analysis in a sample of 713 university students. As hypothesized, the three-factor model fit the data significantly better than the one-factor model. Regression analyses revealed that only authoritarian aggression was related to social dominance orientation. That is, only intolerance of deviance was related to high social dominance, whereas submissiveness was not.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document