Social dominance‐based threat reactions to immigrants in need of assistance

Costello, Kimberly; Hodson, Gordon

doi:10.1002/ejsp.769

Cited by 113 publications

(99 citation statements)

References 52 publications

(80 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…From an intergroup perspective, Integrated Threat Theory (Stephan & Stephan, 2000) posits that perceived outgroup threats are fundamental antecedents to negative outgroup attitudes, and can pertain to threats to dominant ingroup's norms and values, in addition to threats to ideological, political, and economic power (Stephan & Renfro, 2002). Research confirms that perceived outgroup threats challenging either the ingroup's dominant position in society, or the ingroup's cultural norms and beliefs, exacerbate negative outgroup attitudes and behaviors (Riek, Mania, & Gaertner, 2006;Stephan & Renfro, 2002), particularly among those who are most inclined to follow/defend mainstream social norms and dominant ideological systems; those higher in RWA or SDO (e.g., Asbrock, Sibley, & Duckitt, 2010;Costello & Hodson, 2011;Hodson, Hogg, & MacInnis, 2009;McFarland, 2005).…”

Section: Vegetarianism Threat and Human Supremacy Beliefsmentioning

confidence: 82%

Why do right-wing adherents engage in more animal exploitation and meat consumption?

Dhont

Hodson

2014

Personality and Individual Differences

Self Cite

222

227

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Vegetarianism Threat and Human Supremacy Beliefsmentioning

confidence: 82%

Why do right-wing adherents engage in more animal exploitation and meat consumption?

Dhont

Hodson

2014

Personality and Individual Differences

Self Cite

222

227

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Authoritarians' intergroup attitudes are determined mainly by their judgment on whether a particular outgroup threatens the cohesion of their own ingroup, or the security of their social surroundings (Cohrs & Asbrock, 2009;Duckitt, 2006;McFarland, 2005). SDO, on the other hand, makes people more vigilant about whether a certain group threatens their dominant status in the social hierarchy (Cohrs & Asbrock, 2009;Costello & Hodson, 2011;Duckitt, 2006).…”

Section: The Dual Process Model Of Prejudicementioning

confidence: 99%

A closer look at intergroup threat within the dual process model framework: The mediating role of moral foundations

Hadarics¹,

Kende²

2017

Psychol. Thought

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In our study we investigated how right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) are related to perceived intergroup threat, and also tested the potential mediating role of individualizing and binding moral foundations within this relationship pattern. According to our results, both RWA and SDO enhanced the perceived threat related to immigration. Furthermore, the effect of SDO was partly mediated by individualizing moral foundations, while the effect of RWA was partly mediated by both kinds of moral foundations. It seems that perceived intergroup threat, at least to some extent, is influenced by personal moral preferences that can be derived from individual dispositions and motivations.Keywords: right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, moral foundations, intergroup threat, motivated social cognition Europe will undoubtedly remember 2015 as the year of the evolving refugee crisis. As primary transit zones, many Eastern European countries got involved in this crisis without any significant prior experience in its recent history regarding refugees. It became a politically relevant and highly controversial question in these countries, how to respond to the large wave of immigrants and refugees travelling through the region. The question was framed as a moral dilemma between the moral responsibilities to defend the country from the threat of massimmigration and to help people in need.At the same time, as it is indicated by recent research findings about motivated social cognition and moral psychology, moral judgments are influenced by personal motivations and psychological dispositions that also affect intergroup attitudes (Federico, Weber, Ergun, & Hunt, 2013;Kugler, Jost, & Noorbaloochi, 2014;Milojev et al., 2014). Therefore, these moral judgments are necessarily not impartial. Building upon the recent joint research of the dual process model of prejudice and ideologies and moral foundations theory (Federico et al., 2013; Hadarics & Kende, in press;Kugler et al., 2014;Milojev et al., 2014; Radkiewicz, 2016), we attempt to Psychological Thought psyct.psychopen.eu | 2193-7281 support the assumption that the negative perception of outgroups is related to moral concerns that are derived from individual level dispositions. The Dual Process Model of PrejudiceAccording to the Dual Process Model of Prejudice and Ideologies (DPM), all our socially and ideologically relevant beliefs can be arranged along two well distinguished attitudinal dimensions: right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation (Duckitt, 2001;Duckitt & Sibley, 2009. Both dimensions have their unique motivational background, and have very different environmental and personality-related bases. In the case of the first dimension, the main motivation is to establish and maintain order, security, and stability in the social environment. Consequently, all the beliefs and attitudinal preferences belonging to this dimension help reach this goal. The authors suggested that this attitude cluster can b...

show abstract

“…That is, the indifferent person may not blatantly discriminate the other social groups, but may do so by using more subtle ways so as not to consider their problems. For instance, Costello and Hodson (2011) have pointed out that host societies often consider outgroups themselves responsible for not solving their problems (e.g. through hard work or adapting to the dominant culture) and this shift of responsibility upon them (i.e.…”

Section: The Psychology Of the Indifferentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Subtle prejudice and conformism: the intergroup indifference

Passini

2017

Int. j. psychol. res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In understanding the dynamics that lead to the restriction of human rights, social psychology research has mainly focused on the concept of the banality of evil and of obedience to destructive and immoral orders. However, some authors have also underlined the relevant role of by standing and, in general, of indifference in supporting authoritarian policies on a par with the obedience to authority. The aim of this research was to study the notion of intergroup indifference, defined as being uninterested in problems affecting other social groups. The hypothesis was that indifferent people should be characterized by subtle modalities of obedience to authority and prejudicial attitudes, by exclusive attitudes and by conformist and traditional positions. Results showed that participants who respond with an indifferent stance to some parliamentary bills related to arbitrary policies towards minorities appear to be characterized by similar scores on subtle prejudice, submission to authority, conventionalism, willingness to protest, conservative values and moral exclusion attitudes to those people who openly support such policies. Instead, these two groups differ as concerns more overt hostile attitudes. These data suggest that indifferent people have a role in supporting arbitrary policies. As a theoretical implication, future research should consider that intergroup dynamics do not involve just people who obey or disobey authority. People who apparently do not take up any stance before an authority's policies should be considered as well. ResumenEn la comprensión de la dinámica que conduce a la restricción de los derechos humanos, la investigación de la psicología social se ha centrado principalmente en el concepto de la banalidad del mal y de la obediencia aórdenes destructivas e inmorales. Sin embargo, algunos autores también han subrayado el papel relevante de la posición y en general de la indiferencia en el apoyo a las políticas autoritarias, a la par con la obediencia a la autoridad. El objetivo de esta investigación fue estudiar la noción de indiferencia intergrupal, definida esta como el desinterés de los problemas que afectan a otros grupos sociales. La hipótesis era que las personas indiferentes debían caracterizarse por sutiles modalidades de obediencia a la autoridad y actitudes prejuiciadas por actitudes exclusivas, por posiciones conformistas y tradicionales. Los resultados mostraron que los participantes que responden con una postura indiferente a algunos proyectos de ley parlamentarios relacionados con políticas arbitrarias hacia las minorías, parecen caracterizarse por puntuaciones similares en prejuicios sutiles, sumisión a la autoridad, convencionalismo, voluntad de protesta, valores conservadores y actitudes de exclusión moral hacia esas personas que apoyan abiertamente esas políticas. En cambio, estos dos grupos difieren en cuanto a las actitudes manifiestas más hostiles. Estos datos sugieren que las personas indiferentes tienen un rol en apoyar políticas arbitrarias. Como implicación teór...

show abstract

Social dominance‐based threat reactions to immigrants in need of assistance

Cited by 113 publications

References 52 publications

Why do right-wing adherents engage in more animal exploitation and meat consumption?

Why do right-wing adherents engage in more animal exploitation and meat consumption?

A closer look at intergroup threat within the dual process model framework: The mediating role of moral foundations

Subtle prejudice and conformism: the intergroup indifference

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About