A Dual-Process Motivational Model of Ideology, Politics, and Prejudice

Duckitt, John; Sibley, Chris G.

doi:10.1080/10478400903028540

Cited by 371 publications

(464 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

430

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Those at higher levels of a hierarchy typically have greater decision-making authority, privileged access to material and symbolic resources, more rights and freedoms, and greater ability to make and enforce rules than those at lower levels of the hierarchy. Like previous theorists (Altemeyer, 1998;Duckitt & Sibley, 2009;Sidanius & Pratto, 1999), I also recognize that there are both individual-and group-based hierarchies. Individual-based hierarchies occur within groups, where one or more individuals are valued more highly on some dimension (e.g., status, power; Magee & Galinsky, 2008).…”

Section: Social Hierarchiessupporting

confidence: 64%

Seeking structure in social organization: Compensatory control and the psychological advantages of hierarchy.

Friesen

Kay

Eibach

et al. 2014

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

179

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hierarchies are a ubiquitous form of human social organization. We hypothesized that 1 reason for the prevalence of hierarchies is that they offer structure and therefore satisfy the core motivational needs for order and control relative to less structured forms of social organization. This hypothesis is rooted in compensatory control theory, which posits that (a) individuals have a basic need to perceive the world as orderly and structured, and (b) personal and external sources of control are capable of satisfying this need because both serve the comforting belief that the world operates in an orderly fashion. Our first 2 studies confirmed that hierarchies were perceived as more structured and orderly relative to egalitarian arrangements (Study 1) and that working in a hierarchical workplace promotes a feeling of self-efficacy (Study 2). We threatened participants’ sense of personal control and measured perceptions of and preferences for hierarchy in 5 subsequent experiments. Participants who lacked control perceived more hierarchy occurring in ambiguous social situations (Study 3) and preferred hierarchy more strongly in workplace contexts (Studies 4–5). We also provide evidence that hierarchies are indeed appealing because of their structure: Preference for hierarchy was higher among individuals high in Personal Need for Structure and a control threat increased preference for hierarchy even among participants low in Personal Need for Structure (Study 5). Framing a hierarchy as unstructured reversed the effect of control threat on hierarchy (Study 6). Finally, hierarchy-enhancing jobs were more appealing after control threat, even when they were low in power and status (Study 7).

show abstract

Section: Social Hierarchiessupporting

confidence: 64%

Seeking structure in social organization: Compensatory control and the psychological advantages of hierarchy.

Friesen

Kay

Eibach

et al. 2014

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

179

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Within a social-cognition framework, a different literature has focussed on the ideological polarisation currently characterising many developed democracies [53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69][70][71][72]. Most of this work has been carried out within English-speaking countries and is particularly suitable to the Australia setting [19,73,74].…”

Section: Analysis: Interpreting Our Results Within Common Narrativesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Citizens’ Views of Australia’s Future to 2050

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In four focus group exercises involving both forecasting and backcasting approaches, we gave approximately 100 Australian citizens the opportunity to discuss likely, desirable and feared futures to 2050. The image they paint is both coherent and consistent. Education, governance, personal attitudes and societal trends, rather than specific events, are drivers of a future which is perceived as being largely shaped by human choices. Innovation is believed to be more necessary in novel social arrangements than in further technology. The most feared futures arise from an amplification of trends already at play in the present: economic growth at the expense of the environment and quality of life, lack of equity, poor government, corporate greed, commercialism and erosion of social values. Economic and material growth does not feature in the most desired futures which are local, inclusive, peaceful, equitable and in some cases frugal. The visions and scenarios developed find a place within established foresight frameworks and global political narratives, but seem to lie at the fringe of current media and short-term political discourse. These results should not be interpreted as representative of the overall Australian population, but suggest that extending the analysis to the broader community could provide significant insights and enrich the discussion of important societal choices. OPEN ACCESSSustainability 2015, 7 223

show abstract

“…To illustrate with recent examples: Duckitt and Sibley (2009) considered the belief that some groups are superior to others as " deriving directly from the personality dimension of Tough versus Tendermindedness (in Big-Five terms, low Agreeableness)" (p. 102); Chan and Drasgow (2001) argued that Big Five traits "relate to leader behaviors through the individual's motivation to lead, which in turn affects the individual's participation in leadership roles " (p. 481; also Judge, Piccolo, & Kosalka, 2009). Most directly, Terracciano and McCrae (2012) argued that "it is perfectly reasonable to say that party going is caused (proximally) by liking people and that it is caused (distally) by extraversion" (p. 449; italics added in examples above).…”

Section: Locating Structural Factors In the Personality Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

How functionalist and process approaches to behavior can explain trait covariation.

Wood¹,

Gardner²,

Harms³

2015

Psychological Review

181

186

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Factors identified in investigations of trait structure (e.g., the Big Five) are sometimes understood as explanations or sources of the covariation of distinct behavioral traits, as when extraversion is suggested to underlie the covariation of assertiveness and sociability. Here, we detail how trait covariation can alternatively be understood as arising from units common to functionalist and process frameworks, such as self-efficacies, expectancies, values, and goals. Specifically, the expected covariation between 2 behavioral traits should be increased when a specific process variable tends to indicate the functionality of both traits simultaneously. In 2 empirical illustrations, we identify a wide array of specific process variables associated with several Big Five-related behavioral traits simultaneously, and which are thus likely sources of their covariation. Many of these, such as positive interpersonal expectancies, self-regulatory skills, and preference for order, relate similarly to a broad range of trait perceptions in both studies, and across both self- and peer-reports. We also illustrate how this understanding of trait covariation provides a somewhat novel explanation of why some traits are uncorrelated. As we discuss, a functionalist understanding of trait covariation as arising through functionalist or process variables has implications for many basic issues in personality psychology, such as how personality traits should be measured, mechanisms for personality stability and change, and the nature of personality traits more generally.

show abstract

A Dual-Process Motivational Model of Ideology, Politics, and Prejudice

Cited by 371 publications

References 37 publications

Seeking structure in social organization: Compensatory control and the psychological advantages of hierarchy.

Seeking structure in social organization: Compensatory control and the psychological advantages of hierarchy.

Citizens’ Views of Australia’s Future to 2050

How functionalist and process approaches to behavior can explain trait covariation.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About