Search

Across cultures studies show that men score higher on social dominance orientation than women. This gender gap is considered invariant, but conflicting explanations are discussed: Some authors refer to evolutionary psychology and perceive the gender gap to be driven by sociobiological factors. Other authors argue that social roles or gender-stereotypical self-construals encouraged by intergroup comparisons are responsible for attitudinal gender difference. In Study 1 we analyzed sex differences in social dominance orientation in three German probability surveys (each n > 2300). Unexpectedly, the analyses yielded an inverse gender gap with higher values for social dominance orientation in women than in men. Interactions with age, education, political conservatism, and perceived inequity indicated that the inverse gender gap can be mainly attributed to older, conservative, (and less educated) respondents, and those who feel they get their deserved share. In Study 2 we replicated the well-known gender gap with men scoring higher than women in social dominance orientation among German students. Results are interpreted on the basis of biocultural interaction, which integrates the sociobiological, social role, and self-construal perspectives. Our unusual findings seem to reflect a struggle for status by members of low-status groups who consider group-based hierarchy the most promising option to improve their status. While younger women take advantage of a relational, feminine self-construal that leads to lower social dominance orientation in young women than in young men, older women are supposed to profit from an agentic self-construal that results in stronger social dominance orientation values. Specific characteristics of the culture in Germany seem to promote this strategy. Here, we discuss the female ideal of the national socialist period and the agentic female social role in the post-war era necessitated by the absence of men. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examine German participants' assessment of the time of National Socialism. Especially for younger generations, shifts in the culture of remembrance may change their assessments of historical events. We argue that factors such as increased formal education about the topic and decreased personal contact with contemporary witnesses can weaken attributional biases (e.g., ingroup favouritism) in the assessment of the role of the German population during the time of National Socialism. We use data from a German representative sample (N = 1,000) and focus on the links between participants' age and the estimated involvement of the German population under National Socialism as perpetrators, victims, helpers, and "bystanders," as well as the agreement with explanations why the general population did not act against National Socialist crimes. Younger participants estimated the proportions of perpetrators and bystanders within the German population as higher and were less likely to agree that Germans did not know about the systematic killings. Older participants were more likely to agree with situational explanations for the population's inaction (i.e., that Germans did not know or did not have an opportunity to act against the crimes). We find a positive relation between a more critical perspective on the involvement of the population in the past and participants' feelings of responsibility in the present. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]