-
Serge Guimond,
Richard J Crisp,
Pierre De Oliveira,
Rodolphe Kamiejski,
Nour Kteily,
Beate Kuepper,
Richard N Lalonde, Shana Levin,
Felicia Pratto,
Francine Tougas,
Jim Sidanius,
Andreas Zick
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: In contrast to authors of previous single-nation studies, we propose that supporting multiculturalism (MC) or assimilation (AS) is likely to have different effects in different countries, depending on the diversity policy in place in a particular country and the associated norms. A causal model of intergroup attitudes and behaviors, integrating both country-specific factors (attitudes and perceived norms related to a particular diversity policy) and general social-psychological determinants (social dominance orientation), was tested among participants from countries where the pro-diversity policy was independently classified as low, medium, or high (N = 1,232). Results showed that (a) anti-Muslim prejudice was significantly reduced when the pro-diversity policy was high; (b) countries differed strongly in perceived norms related to MC and AS, in ways consistent with the actual diversity policy in each country and regardless of participants' personal attitudes toward MC and AS; (c) as predicted, when these norms were salient, due to subtle priming, structural equation modeling with country included as a variable provided support for the proposed model, suggesting that the effect of country on prejudice can be successfully accounted by it; and (d) consistent with the claim that personal support for MC and AS played a different role in different countries, within-country mediation analyses provided evidence that personal attitudes toward AS mediated the effect of social dominance orientation on prejudice when pro-diversity policy was low, whereas personal attitudes toward MC was the mediator when pro-diversity policy was high. Thus, the critical variables shaping prejudice can vary across nations. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved).
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 03/2013; · 5.08 Impact Factor
-
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations 07/2012; · 1.24 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Using American college student samples, two studies were conducted to establish the connection between perceptions of threat posed by people of the Muslim world and intergroup emotions toward this group. Study 1, a correlational study, situated these relationships within Duckitt's (2001) dual process model. Path analyses revealed that perceptions of economic threat from Muslims were predicted by a motivation for hierarchical group relations, as manifested by social dominance orientation. Perceptions of value threat from Muslims were predicted by a motivation for social stability and security, as mani-fested by right-wing authoritarianism. These economic and value threat perceptions subsequently predicted the inter-group emotions of anger and disgust, respectively. Study 2, an experimental study, involved a manipulation of value threat from Muslims. Results showed that perceiving Muslims to pose a greater threat to Westerners' values heightened feelings of disgust, which subsequently pre-dicted behavioral inclinations to maintain traditional Western values.
Motivation and Emotion 02/2012; · 1.23 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Social dominance orientation (SDO) is one of the most powerful predictors of intergroup attitudes and behavior. Although SDO works well as a unitary construct, some analyses suggest it might consist of two complementary dimensions--SDO-Dominance (SDO-D), or the preference for some groups to dominate others, and SDO-Egalitarianism (SDO-E), a preference for nonegalitarian intergroup relations. Using seven samples from the United States and Israel, the authors confirm factor-analytic evidence and show predictive validity for both dimensions. In the United States, SDO-D was theorized and found to be more related to old-fashioned racism, zero-sum competition, and aggressive intergroup phenomena than SDO-E; SDO-E better predicted more subtle legitimizing ideologies, conservatism, and opposition to redistributive social policies. In a contentious hierarchical intergroup context (the Israeli-Palestinian context), SDO-D better predicted both conservatism and aggressive intergroup attitudes. Fundamentally, these analyses begin to establish the existence of complementary psychological orientations underlying the preference for group-based dominance and inequality.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 01/2012; 38(5):583-606. · 2.22 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This study assessed the role of expert testimony and just world beliefs (JWB) in de-cisions made in a sexually violent predator (SVP) trial. Three participant samples (student, juror, and community; total N = 534) completed items measuring JWB and watched a 1-hour videotaped trial simulation that featured a psychologist offering different types of expert testimony in a SVP hearing. After the opening statements and at the end of the trial presentation, participants made commit-ment decisions and rated their confidence in their decision. They also rated the expert testimony on influence, credibility, scientificness, and confidence. Results indicated that favorable attitudes toward the expert mediated the relationship be-tween JWB and commitment decisions. This relationship did not differ depending on type of expert testimony (clinical vs. actuarial) proffered. The legal and policy implications of the findings are discussed. Expert witnesses play a vital role in our legal system by using their advanced training and expertise to offer case-relevant knowledge and opinions (Campbell, 2010; Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 702). Psychologists offering expert tes-timony serve an especially important function because they provide juries with specialized psychological information and judgment necessary for judicious
Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy 01/2012; 00:1-24.
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This study assessed the role of expert testimony and just world beliefs (JWB) in decisions made in a sexually violent predator (SVP) trial. Three participant samples (student, juror, and community; total N = 534) completed items measuring JWB and watched a 1-hour videotaped trial simulation that featured a psychologist offering different types of expert testimony in a SVP hearing. After the opening statements and at the end of the trial presentation, participants made commitment decisions and rated their confidence in their decision. They also rated the expert testimony on influence, credibility, scientificness, and confidence. Results indicated that favorable attitudes toward the expert mediated the relationship between JWB and commitment decisions. This relationship did not differ depending on type of expert testimony (clinical vs. actuarial) proffered. The legal and policy implications of the findings are discussed.
Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy 01/2012;
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Using correlational and experimental data, we examined the degree to which personal and perceived normative support for the acculturation ideologies of assimilation, multiculturalism, and colorblindness mediated and moderated the relationship between social dominance orientation (SDO) and prejudice among 299 White students at three American colleges. Correlational results indicated that personal support for the acculturation ideologies mediated the SDO–prejudice relationship. Personal support for assimilation (a hierarchy-enhancing ideology) positively related to SDO; multiculturalism and colorblindness (hierarchy-attenuating ideologies) negatively related to SDO. An experimental manipulation varied whether assimilation, multiculturalism, or colorblindness was considered normative in the United States. In addition to a control, a fifth condition primed the Obama presidency. SDO related most strongly to prejudice toward American immigrants and ethnic minorities when assimilation norms and the Obama presidency were primed. Efforts to reduce the associations between SDO and prejudice are discussed in terms of highlighting hierarchy-attenuating national norms of multiculturalism and colorblindness. "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" Emma Lazarus, "The New Colossus" (1883) Emma Lazarus's famous words, engraved on the Statue of Liberty, greeted thousands of American immigrants. Contrary to the poem's hopeful intent, many different ethnic and cultural groups have experienced prejudice and discrimination in American society. According to social dominance theory, a major factor driving group prejudice is social dominance orientation (SDO). SDO captures individuals' support for hierarchical relationships among societal groups. Those high in SDO want to establish and maintain power differences between groups; one way they may do so is by denigrating subordinate groups (e.g., Levin & Sidanius, 1999). People who experience prejudice and discrimination suffer many negative out-comes, including poorer mental and physical health (e.g., Landrine & Klonoff, 1996). These negative outcomes reinforce their subordinate position in American society. Acts of prejudice can thereby serve the desires of high SDO individuals to maintain group-based inequality. Although the link between SDO and prejudice has been studied extensively (e.g., Sibley & Duckitt, 2008), personal and normative beliefs that might mediate and moderate the SDO–prejudice rela-tionship have received less empirical attention. In the current study, we measure and manipulate personal and perceived normative support for the three acculturation ideologies of assimilation, multiculturalism, and colorblindness in order to better understand their role in mediating and moderating the relationships between SDO and prejudice toward minority groups among Whites in the United States. Social dominance theory According to social dominance theory, hierarchies can be en-hanced or attenuated by both personal and normative support for legitimizing ideologies. Legitimizing ideologies can be classified into two different functional types: hierarchy-enhancing and hierarchy-attenuating (Pratto, Sidanius, & Levin, 2006; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Hierarchy-enhancing ideologies facilitate greater levels of group-based social inequality; hierarchy-attenuating ideologies promote
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 01/2012; 48:207-212. · 2.31 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This research examines cross-ethnic friendships as a predictor of perceived discrimination and support for ethnic activism over time among African American, Latino American, and Asian American undergraduate participants from a multi-year, longitudinal study conducted in the United States. Our research builds on prior cross-sectional research by testing effects longitudinally and examining how relationships among these variables may differ across ethnic minority groups. Results indicate that, over time, greater friendships with Whites predict both lower perceptions of discrimination and less support for ethnic activism among African Americans and Latino Americans, but not among Asian Americans. Implications of these findings for future research on inter-group contact, minority-majority relations, and ethnic group differences in status are discussed.
British Journal of Social Psychology 09/2011; 51(2):257-72. · 1.76 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Social dominance theory distinguishes between hierarchy-enhancing environments, which promote inequality between groups (e.g., American society), and hierarchy-attenuating environments, which promote equality between groups (e.g., universities). Consistent with predictions derived from this distinction, a panel study that assessed attitudes prior to university exposure and after one year of university exposure yielded three findings: (1) exposure to the university decreased antiegalitarian attitudes; (2) at the end of their first year of college, European Americans exhibited greater national attachment than Asian Americans, Latinos, and African Americans, but members of all groups exhibited similar levels of university attachment; and (3) European Americans exhibited a more positive association between ethnic attachment and national attachment than members of the other three groups, but members of all groups exhibited similar relationships between ethnic attachment and university attachment.
Journal of Social Issues 04/2010; 54(4):741 - 757. · 1.96 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Dominant groups have claimed to be the targets of discrimination on several historical occasions during violent intergroup conflict and genocide.The authors argue that perceptions of ethnic victimization among members of dominant groups express social dominance motives and thus may be recruited for the enforcement of group hierarchy. They examine the antecedents of perceived ethnic victimization among dominants, following 561 college students over 3 years from freshman year to graduation year. Using longitudinal, cross-lagged structural equation modeling, the authors show that social dominance orientation (SDO) positively predicts perceived ethnic victimization among Whites but not among Latinos, whereas victimization does not predict SDO over time. In contrast, ethnic identity and victimization reciprocally predicted each other longitudinally with equal strength among White and Latino students. SDO is not merely a reflection of contextualized social identity concerns but a psychological, relational motivation that undergirds intergroup attitudes across extended periods of time and interacts with the context of group dominance.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 12/2009; 36(2):225-38. · 2.22 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Using data from a longitudinal study of college students, this study assessed the relationships among the threat perceptions of realistic threat and intergroup anxiety, the ideological motives of system justification and social dominance orientation (SDO), and political conservatism. Those who had higher perceptions of realistic threat and intergroup anxiety at the end of their first year of college showed higher levels of system justification and SDO at the end of their second and third years of college, controlling for precollege expressions of each variable. Higher levels of these two ideological motives at the end of students' second and third years of college were associated with more politically conservative attitudes at the end of students' fourth year of college, again controlling for precollege expressions. These longitudinal results are discussed in terms of a model of political conservatism as motivated social cognition.
Political Psychology 10/2009; 30(6):921 - 936. · 1.71 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The common in-group identity model advocates the creation of a superordinate group identity in order to reduce conflict between members of different ethnic subgroups. This study demonstrates that a university identity can serve as an effective common in-group identity for students from different ethnic groups. Longitudinal data were collected from an ethnically diverse sample of university students at the end of each year of college. Although ethnic identification tended to be correlated with status-legitimizing orientations and ideologies in a way that reinforces ethnic-status differences (i.e., these variables tended to be positively related for Whites but less so for ethnic minorities), the status-legitimizing variables were largely unrelated to university identification during each year in college. The longitudinal data also allowed us to examine these relationships over time. The relationships between ethnic and university identification and status-legitimizing orientations and ideologies did not change. Ethnic and university identities are discussed in terms of the common in-group identity model.
Journal of Social Issues 04/2009; 65(2):287 - 306. · 1.96 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Integrating insights from research examining the effect of being seen through the lens of stereotypes on academic performance and the social identity perspective, we examine the effect of perceived affirmative action admission at college entry on academic performance at the end of the first year. We propose that stereotype threat plays a crucial moderating role in determining when performance is affected. A longitudinal study of Black and Latino students at a large multiethnic university showed that perceptions of affirmative action admission negatively affected achievement among high stereotype-threatened individuals but not among low stereotype-threatened individuals. Furthermore, the results show that stereotype threat can have its effects because of concerns for the self (personal identity stereotype threat) or because of concerns for the group (social identity stereotype threat). As expected, social identity stereotype threat negatively affected the performance of individuals high in ethnic identification, whereas personal identity stereotype threat negatively affected the performance of individuals low in ethnic identification.
Basic and Applied Social Psychology 10/2008; 30(4):295-310. · 0.38 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Using a 5-year longitudinal study, we investigated the long-term effects of courses with ethnic studies content and courses with Latino or Black professors on university students' intergroup attitudes. We found that these curricular variables significantly affected the intergroup attitudes of students beyond pre-existing differences in attitudes and beyond other curriculum variables. As expected, we found differences between ethnic groups: White students showed movement toward other groups as a result of these curricular factors, whereas Latino and African American students showed both increased tolerance toward other groups and movement toward the in-group. The results are discussed in terms of group status differences between the dominant White majority and the stigmatized Latino and Black minority groups.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology 05/2008; 38(6):1601 - 1638. · 0.63 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This study examined relationships among same-ethnicity friendships, perceptions of ethnic discrimination, and social and academic adjustment in college using a large longitudinal sample of White, Asian, Latino, and African American students. Results demonstrated that Latino students who had more in-group friends during college exhibited reduced belonging and academic performance at the end of college. Perceived discrimination also had negative effects on Latino students' sense of belonging. For African American students, having more in-group friends during college was related to enhanced academic commitment and motivation at the end of college. Perceiving more discrimination was also associated with enhanced academic motivation for African American students. Explanations for the divergent experiences of the two minority groups on campus are discussed.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology 05/2006; 36(6):1471 - 1501. · 0.63 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Social dominance theory has generally posited that terror and intergroup violence can be explained in terms of social dominance struggles. Social dominance theorists have described terror mostly as a tool for maintaining intergroup hierarchies in society (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Although implications of the theory suggest that terror may also be used by lower status groups as a tool for the resistance of domination by higher status groups, this prediction heretofore has not been empirically demonstrated. Data from two samples, one in the United States and one in Lebanon, were collected regarding attitudes toward terrorism and intergroup violence. The results show that the American sample demonstrates the typical patterns of social dominance such that those who are higher in social dominance orientation tend to support greater violence toward the Middle East. However, the Lebanese sample shows the opposite pattern, such that those who are lower in social dominance orientation tend to support violence toward the West. These results suggest that (1) support for terrorism among Middle East citizens is a project of counterdominance, and, more broadly, that (2) the relationship between social dominance orientation and support for violence depends on the dynamics of the conflict and the status of the perpetrators.
Political Psychology 07/2005; 26(4):569 - 584. · 1.71 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The theory has been misconstrued in four primary ways, which are often expressed as the claims of psychological reductionism, conceptual redundancy, biological reductionism, and hierarchy justification. This paper addresses these claims and suggests how social dominance theory builds on and moves beyond social identity theory and system justification theory.
Political Psychology 11/2004; 25(6):845 - 880. · 1.71 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: An experiment varying the racial (Black, White) and opinion composition in small-group discussions was conducted with college students (N = 357) at three universities to test for effects on the perceived novelty of group members' contributions to discussion and on participants' integrative complexity. Results showed that racial and opinion minorities were both perceived as contributing to novelty. Generally positive effects on integrative complexity were found when the groups had racial- and opinion-minority members and when members reported having racially diverse friends and classmates. The findings are discussed in the context of social psychological theories of minority influence and social policy implications for affirmative action. The research supports claims about the educational significance of race in higher education, as well as the complexity of the interaction of racial diversity with contextual and individual factors.
Psychological Science 09/2004; 15(8):507-10. · 4.43 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The effects of membership in ethnic organizations and fraternities and sororities on intergroup attitudes were examined using a 5-wave panel study at a major, multiethnic university. The results showed that these effects were similar for both minority and White students. Membership in ethnic student organizations for minorities and Greek organizations for Whites was anteceded by the degree of one's ethnic identity, and the effects of membership in these groups were similar, although not identical, for both White and minority students. These effects included an increased sense of ethnic victimization and a decreased sense of common identity and social inclusiveness. Consistent with social identity theory, at least a portion of these effects were mediated by social identity among both White and minority students.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 08/2004; 87(1):96-110. · 5.08 Impact Factor
-
[show abstract]
[hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Theory and research suggest that members of high-status groups feel more positively about their own group than members of low-status groups feel about their group. The studies presented here test two hypotheses derived from this general idea (1) that members of high-status groups will show greater bias in favor of the in-group when they believe that others perceive the status difference between their group and relevant low-status groups to be larger; and (2) that this relationship will be stronger when high-status group members also endorse ideologies legitimizing their privileged status. However, because low group status may have self-protective properties, it was hypothesized that imputed status differences would not relate to out-group bias among low-status group members, regardless of ideology endorsement. Two studies—using samples from the United States and Israel, respectively—provided clear support for these hypotheses. Implications for the study of both intergroup biases and legitimizing ideologies are discussed.
Social Justice Research 02/2004; 17(1):47-73. · 0.89 Impact Factor
