Authoritarianism, social dominance orientation and prejudice: Effects of various self-categorization conditions

Dru, Vincent

doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2006.10.008

Cited by 64 publications

(83 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…First, these authors argue that SDO behaves differently as a function of the social context in which it is measured. It has been shown that correlations between SDO and outcome measures can in fact differ as a function of salient features of the social context (e.g., Lehmiller & Schmitt, 2007;Dru, 2007;Duckitt & Sibley, 2010; but see Cohrs &Asbrock, 2009, andHeaven &St. Quintin, 2003, who fail to find evidence for moderating effects of context on SDO).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hierarchy in the mind: The predictive power of social dominance orientation across social contexts and domains

Kteily

Sidanius

2012

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hierarchy in the mind: The predictive power of social dominance orientation across social contexts and domains

Kteily

Sidanius

2012

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The critical role of zero-sum beliefs in producing and sustaining negative attitudes toward immigrants may be due to the implicit assumption that policies that support immigrants' integration utilize common resources that could be employed otherwise, favouring the respondents' own group. Building on this work, Duckitt and Sibley (2010) found a significant interaction between SDO and a manipulation of information about immigrants competing with nonimmigrants for economic resources, such that individuals who were higher in social dominance orientation and read about competition from immigrants were especially likely to oppose their immigration (see also Dru, 2007). In addition, a similar interaction with SDO was obtained using a manipulation of immigrant disadvantage and low status, presumably because high social dominance oriented individuals are likely to devalue low status groups in order to justify their own group's relatively superiority.…”

Section: Maintenance Of the Status Quo: Social Dominance Theory And Ementioning

confidence: 95%

What causes prejudice? How may we solve it? Lay beliefs and their relations with classical and modern prejudice and social dominance orientation

Miglietta

Gattino

Esses

2014

International Journal of Intercultural Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What causes prejudice? How may we solve it? Lay beliefs and their relations with classical and modern prejudice and social dominance orientation Abstract: This research aimed to examine lay beliefs about the causes of and solutions to ethnic prejudice towards immigrant populations in the Italian context. The research had two main goals: (a) to explore in Italy what non-experts think causes ethnic prejudice against immigrants, and how they suggest we combat it; (b) to assess whether lay perceptions of causes of ethnic prejudice mediate the relationship between SDO and ethnic prejudice, and whether such mediational effects would depend on the form of ethnic prejudice considered (classical vs. modern). In particular, we hypothesized that lay beliefs about the causes of (but not lay beliefs about solutions to) prejudice towards immigrants may mediate the relation between SDO and prejudice towards immigrants. 520 Italian high school students participated in the study and completed a set of questionnaires regarding these issues. Results showed that Italian respondents were especially likely to attribute the causes of ethnic prejudice towards immigrants to ignorance and close-mindedness, and to recommend as main solutions open-mindedness and tolerance of others' values. Moreover, as predicted, beliefs about causes of ethnic prejudice significantly mediated the relation between SDO and modern (but not classical) prejudice. Implications of our findings for social dominance theory were discussed.

show abstract

“…The seventh questionnaire was the French version of the Right Wing Authoritarism questionnaire (Altemeyer, 1996) proposed by Dru (2007). It was composed of three scales measuring Authoritarian Aggression (e.g., Our country desperately needs a mighty leader who will do what has to be done to destroy the radical new ways and sinfulness that are ruining us), Authoritarian Submission (e.g., It is always better to trust the judgment of the proper authorities in government and religion than to listen to the noisy rabble-rousers in our society who are trying to create doubt in people's minds), and Conventionalism (e.g., The old-fashioned ways and old-fashioned values still show the best way to live.).…”

Section: Right Wing Authoritarianismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public Perception of the Motives that Lead Political Leaders to Launch Interstate Armed Conflicts: A Structural and Cross-Cultural Study

Djeriouat¹,

Mullet

2013

Univ Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe way the people from two culturally very different countries perceive the psychological motives that lead political leaders to launch armed actions against other states was examined. Three types of possible psychological motives, taken from McClelland's (1985) theory of human motivation, were considered: motives associated with the state's power (e.g., increasing the country's economic power), motives associated with other states' political character (e.g., whether neighboring states are relatively peaceful democracies or threatening autocracies), and motives associated with domestic issues (e.g., appearing as a strong leader able to efficiently fight for the security of the country). A total of 442 participants living in Western Europe (France) and 180 participants living in the Maghreb (Algeria) were presented with a Motives of War questionnaire that was created for the present set of studies. Exploratory and confirmatory analyses showed that the hypothesized model of motives holds with the condition that the increasing power motive is divided into two separate motives: one associated with the economy and one associated with the territory. The motives of war tended to be seen as more personal and as more associated with domestic issues among people living in Algeria than among people living in France. Among traditional/ authoritarian people living in France, the motives of war tended to be seen in a more positive light than among liberal people. In contrast, among traditional/authoritarian people living in Algeria, the motives of war tend to be seen in a more negative light than among liberal people. Key words authorsInternational Conflicts, Human Motivation, Aggression, Personality, Values, Conservatism. Key words plusPublic Perceptions, Structural and Transcultural Study r e s u m e n Se examina la forma en que las personas de dos países culturalmente muy diferentes perciben los motivos psicológicos que conducen a los líderes políticos a poner en marcha acciones armadas contra otro estados. Tres tipos de motivos psicológicos posibles, tomados de la teoría de McClelland (1985) sobre la motivación humana fueron consideradas: motivos asociados con el estado de poder (e.g., incrementar el poder económico del país),

show abstract

Authoritarianism, social dominance orientation and prejudice: Effects of various self-categorization conditions

Cited by 64 publications

References 27 publications

Hierarchy in the mind: The predictive power of social dominance orientation across social contexts and domains

Hierarchy in the mind: The predictive power of social dominance orientation across social contexts and domains

What causes prejudice? How may we solve it? Lay beliefs and their relations with classical and modern prejudice and social dominance orientation

Public Perception of the Motives that Lead Political Leaders to Launch Interstate Armed Conflicts: A Structural and Cross-Cultural Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About