scholarly journals Liking low-status? Contextual and individual differences in attributional biases of low-status outgroup members

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 192-212
Author(s):  
Tomasz Besta ◽  
Gülçin Akbas ◽  
Emma A. Renström ◽  
Natasza Kosakowska-Berezecka ◽  
Alexandra Vazquez
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Power Distance ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Psychology Students ◽  
Social Hierarchy ◽  
Target Groups ◽  
Orientation Study ◽  
Attributional Biases ◽  
Human Trait

Previous studies on biased intergroup perceptions of outgroups’ irrationality mostly treated the target groups as opponents and rivals. In three studies, we extended this line of research and tested the hypothesis that individuals who challenge the existing social hierarchy exhibit more positive biases toward low-status outgroup members. We also hypothesized that when irrational thinking is framed as an important human trait, this bias is reduced among low social dominance orientation (SDO) individuals. In three studies (N = 169, N = 450, and N = 161), conducted in countries that vary in power distance levels (Poland, Spain, Sweden and Turkey), we examined under which conditions low-status outgroups are perceived as more rational than ingroup members. The results show that in a condition without irrationality framed as a human trait, psychology students (Study 1 and Study 2) and nonstudents low in group-based dominance orientation (Study 3) perceive outgroup members as less irrational than ingroup members. However, when participants were reminded that irrationality is a human trait, the perceived differences between in- and outgroup members were reduced. This effect was observed in all four countries (Study 1 and Study 2) and held when variables related to the tendency to behave in a socially desirable way were controlled for (Study 3).

scholarly journals Increased Conformity to Social Hierarchy Under Public Eyes

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daeeun Kim ◽  
JuYoung Kim ◽  
Hackjin Kim
Keyword(s):  
Social Status ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Social Rank ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Social Hierarchy ◽  
Negative Evaluation ◽  
Fear Of Negative Evaluation ◽  
The Public ◽  
Individual Preferences ◽  
The Social

Why would people conform more to others with higher social positions? People may place higher confidence in the opinions of those who rank higher in the social hierarchy, or they may wish to make better impressions on people of higher social status. We investigated how individual preferences for novel stimuli are influenced by the preferences of others in the social hierarchy and whether anonymity affects such preference changes. After manipulation of their social rank, participants were asked to indicate how much they liked or disliked a series of images. Then, they were shown the rating given to each image by a partner (either inferior or superior in social rank) and were given a chance to adjust their ratings. The participants were more likely to change their preferences to match those of a superior partner in the public vs. private condition. The tendency to conform to the views of the superior partner was stronger among those with higher social dominance orientation (SDO) and those with greater fear of negative evaluation (FNE) by others. Altogether, the findings suggest that the motivation to make better impressions on people of higher social status can be the major driver of conformity to others with higher social positions.

Examining dispositional and situational effects on outgroup attitudes

2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 307-328 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joke Meeus ◽  
Bart Duriez ◽  
Norbert Vanbeselaere ◽  
Karen Phalet ◽  
Peter Kuppens
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Intergroup Relations ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Right Wing Authoritarianism ◽  
Situational Characteristics ◽  
Situational Effects ◽  
Ingroup Identification ◽  
The Individual

Two research lines have dominated the quest for the antecedents of outgroup attitudes. Whereas the first has viewed outgroup attitudes as a result of individual differences, the second stressed the importance of the intergroup situation. In order to investigate the interplay of individual differences and situational characteristics, key predictors of the individual differences perspective (i.e. right‐wing authoritarianism or RWA, and social dominance orientation or SDO) and the intergroup relations perspective (i.e. ingroup identification and ingroup threat) were simultaneously tested. Two studies revealed additive but no interaction effects of RWA and SDO, ingroup identification and threat. Additionally, Study 1 showed that threat effects remain limited to the outgroup that is portrayed as threatening and do not generalize to other outgroups. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The David and Goliath Principle

2012 ◽  
Vol 38 (8) ◽  
pp. 1053-1065 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carla H. Jeffries ◽  
Matthew J. Hornsey ◽  
Robbie M. Sutton ◽  
Karen M. Douglas ◽  
Paul G. Bain
Keyword(s):  
Low Power ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
High Power ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Power Distance ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Australian Sample ◽  
David And Goliath

Two studies documented the “David and Goliath” rule—the tendency for people to perceive criticism of “David” groups (groups with low power and status) as less normatively permissible than criticism of “Goliath” groups (groups with high power and status). The authors confirmed the existence of the David and Goliath rule across Western and Chinese cultures (Study 1). However, the rule was endorsed more strongly in Western than in Chinese cultures, an effect mediated by cultural differences in power distance. Study 2 identified the psychological underpinnings of this rule in an Australian sample. Lower social dominance orientation (SDO) was associated with greater endorsement of the rule, an effect mediated through the differential attribution of stereotypes. Specifically, those low in SDO were more likely to attribute traits of warmth and incompetence to David versus Goliath groups, a pattern of stereotypes that was related to the protection of David groups from criticism.

scholarly journals A Multi-Level Research Framework for the Analyses of Attitudes Toward Immigrants

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Chan-Hoong Leong
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Self Esteem ◽  
Host Community ◽  
Cultural Assimilation ◽  
Attitudes Toward Immigrants ◽  
National Pride ◽  
Final Study

<p>Contemporary research on acculturation tended to focus on the sojourners' or immigrants' perspectives on adaptation. The current dissertation however, centers on recipient nationals' attitudes toward immigrants and perceptions of multiculturalism. Three distinctive frameworks to study host nationals' perceptions are adopted; they include: (1) intergroup relations, (2) individual differences, and (3) cultural differences. Five separate studies were done based on the three frameworks using attitudes toward Chinese immigrants as the dependent measure in all except the final study. Based on the intergroup framework, Study 1 and 2 examined the influence of intergroup contact, national pride, perceived permeability, fairness, threat and host community acculturation strategies. Results showed that decreased contact and increased threat predicted less favorable perception towards immigrants (Study 1); respondents who espoused a need for immigrant assimilation and exclusionism, and those who adopted a less individualistic perception towards migration tended to express a more negative attitude (Study 2). Based on an individual differences framework, Study 3 and 4 examined the influence of social dominance orientation, self-esteem, individualism-collectivism, national pride and personal values. Increased self-esteem and collectivism predicted more favorable attitudes toward immigrants, and increased social dominance orientation predicted less favourable perceptions among host nationals who rated high on individualism (Study 3); respondents who placed greater emphases on security and achievement motivation have expressed more negative attitudes, but endorsement of stimulation value predicted more favourable perceptions (Study 4). In the final study, cultural differences were adopted as correlates of attitudes. Secondary data from the Eurobarometer (2000) and Schwartz's and Hofstede's typologies of cultural differences were used. Based on Schwartz's model, increased mastery was associated with less multicultural optimism; increased egalitarian commitment was linked to lesser support for policies that promote co-existence; and increased harmony was related to less demand for cultural assimilation. Based on Hofstede's model, increased masculinity was associated with less multicultural optimism and lower demand for cultural assimilation; and increased uncertainty avoidance was related to decreased multicultural optimism. Overall, two broad dimensions of acculturation experience have emerged from the research, first one is based on an 'invasion' perspective and the second one reflects an 'enrichment' experience.</p>

scholarly journals A Multi-Level Research Framework for the Analyses of Attitudes Toward Immigrants

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Chan-Hoong Leong
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Self Esteem ◽  
Host Community ◽  
Cultural Assimilation ◽  
Attitudes Toward Immigrants ◽  
National Pride ◽  
Final Study

<p>Contemporary research on acculturation tended to focus on the sojourners' or immigrants' perspectives on adaptation. The current dissertation however, centers on recipient nationals' attitudes toward immigrants and perceptions of multiculturalism. Three distinctive frameworks to study host nationals' perceptions are adopted; they include: (1) intergroup relations, (2) individual differences, and (3) cultural differences. Five separate studies were done based on the three frameworks using attitudes toward Chinese immigrants as the dependent measure in all except the final study. Based on the intergroup framework, Study 1 and 2 examined the influence of intergroup contact, national pride, perceived permeability, fairness, threat and host community acculturation strategies. Results showed that decreased contact and increased threat predicted less favorable perception towards immigrants (Study 1); respondents who espoused a need for immigrant assimilation and exclusionism, and those who adopted a less individualistic perception towards migration tended to express a more negative attitude (Study 2). Based on an individual differences framework, Study 3 and 4 examined the influence of social dominance orientation, self-esteem, individualism-collectivism, national pride and personal values. Increased self-esteem and collectivism predicted more favorable attitudes toward immigrants, and increased social dominance orientation predicted less favourable perceptions among host nationals who rated high on individualism (Study 3); respondents who placed greater emphases on security and achievement motivation have expressed more negative attitudes, but endorsement of stimulation value predicted more favourable perceptions (Study 4). In the final study, cultural differences were adopted as correlates of attitudes. Secondary data from the Eurobarometer (2000) and Schwartz's and Hofstede's typologies of cultural differences were used. Based on Schwartz's model, increased mastery was associated with less multicultural optimism; increased egalitarian commitment was linked to lesser support for policies that promote co-existence; and increased harmony was related to less demand for cultural assimilation. Based on Hofstede's model, increased masculinity was associated with less multicultural optimism and lower demand for cultural assimilation; and increased uncertainty avoidance was related to decreased multicultural optimism. Overall, two broad dimensions of acculturation experience have emerged from the research, first one is based on an 'invasion' perspective and the second one reflects an 'enrichment' experience.</p>

The Effects of Mortality Salience and Social Dominance Orientation on Attitudes Toward Illegal Immigrants

2010 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan F. Bassett
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
University Students ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Mortality Salience ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Political Orientation ◽  
Illegal Immigrants ◽  
Negative Attitudes ◽  
Main Effect ◽  
Political Conservatism

The paper examines the hypothesis that the effects of mortality salience on attitudes toward illegal immigrants are moderated by individual differences predisposing participants toward prejudice or intolerance. A total of 122 university students completed measures of political orientation, authoritarianism, and social dominance orientation prior to being randomly assigned to a mortality salience or control condition. Political conservatism, authoritarianism, and social dominance orientation were all associated with more negative attitudes toward illegal immigrants. Although there was no main effect for mortality salience, there was an interaction between mortality salience and social dominance orientation. Higher social dominance orientation was associated with more negative attitudes toward illegal immigrants, albeit only in the mortality salience condition.

scholarly journals Parasite stress and pathogen avoidance relate to distinct dimensions of political ideology across 30 nations

2016 ◽  
Vol 113 (44) ◽  
pp. 12408-12413 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua M. Tybur ◽  
Yoel Inbar ◽  
Lene Aarøe ◽  
Pat Barclay ◽  
Fiona Kate Barlow ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Infectious Disease ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Cultural Evolution ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Political Ideology ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Group Norms ◽  
Disgust Sensitivity ◽  
Local Norms ◽  
Pathogen Avoidance

People who are more avoidant of pathogens are more politically conservative, as are nations with greater parasite stress. In the current research, we test two prominent hypotheses that have been proposed as explanations for these relationships. The first, which is an intragroup account, holds that these relationships between pathogens and politics are based on motivations to adhere to local norms, which are sometimes shaped by cultural evolution to have pathogen-neutralizing properties. The second, which is an intergroup account, holds that these same relationships are based on motivations to avoid contact with outgroups, who might pose greater infectious disease threats than ingroup members. Results from a study surveying 11,501 participants across 30 nations are more consistent with the intragroup account than with the intergroup account. National parasite stress relates to traditionalism (an aspect of conservatism especially related to adherence to group norms) but not to social dominance orientation (SDO; an aspect of conservatism especially related to endorsements of intergroup barriers and negativity toward ethnic and racial outgroups). Further, individual differences in pathogen-avoidance motives (i.e., disgust sensitivity) relate more strongly to traditionalism than to SDO within the 30 nations.

scholarly journals Relationships between individual endorsement of aggressive behaviors and thoughts with prejudice relevant correlates among adolescents

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni Piumatti ◽  
Cristina Mosso
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Emotional Control ◽  
Aggressive Behaviors ◽  
Future Studies ◽  
Interpersonal Aggression ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Lower Tolerance

The current study explored how individual differences in endorsement of aggressive behaviors and thoughts relate to individual levels of tolerance and prejudice toward immigrants and established prejudice correlates such as social dominance orientation (SDO) and ethnic out-groups ratings among adolescents. Participants (N = 141; Age M = 16.08, 68% girls) completed the Readiness for Interpersonal Aggression Inventory, the Tolerance and Prejudice Questionnaire, and measures of SDO and ethnic out-groups ratings. Results indicated that higher individual endorsement of aggression was related to higher prejudice and SDO and lower tolerance and ethnic out-groups ratings. Patterns of endorsement of aggression related to habitual and socially determined aggressive acts or stable needs to hurt others as a source of satisfaction were significantly correlated with prejudice. Conversely, the relationship between prejudice and endorsement of impulsive actions lacking of emotional control resulted was less marked. The results highlight how in the cognitive spectrum of prejudice, individual levels of endorsement of aggression may play a significant triggering role during adolescence. These findings may have implications for future studies and interventions aimed at reducing prejudice already in young ages.

Social Dominance Orientation Predicts Opposition to Hierarchy-Attenuating Intergroup Apologies

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (12) ◽  
pp. 1651-1665 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kanishka Karunaratne ◽  
Simon M. Laham
Keyword(s):  
Social Dominance ◽  
Cultural Context ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
International Study ◽  
Social Hierarchy ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Social Hierarchies ◽  
Total N ◽  
Negative Effect

People who value social hierarchy may resist giving intergroup apologies because such apologies may attenuate the very hierarchies that these people value. We tested this claim across four studies (total N = 541) by examining associations between social dominance orientation (SDO)—a measure of preference for social hierarchy—and support for intergroup apologies. We found that higher SDO scores, and specifically the antiegalitarianism subdimension (social dominance orientation–egalitarianism [SDO-E]), predicted less apology support among U.S. residents in both domestic (Study 1) and international (Study 2) contexts. In Study 3, we found that the effect generalizes to an Australian cultural context. In Study 4, we demonstrated that the negative effect of SDO-E can extend to third-party contexts and is only observed when apologizing would be hierarchy attenuating. These studies show that the desire to maintain social hierarchies is an important driver of opposition to hierarchy-attenuating intergroup apologies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document