Search

A meta-analysis examined the extent to which socio-stmctural and psycho-cultural characteristics of societies correspond with how much gender and ethnic/racial groups differ on their support of group- based hierarchy. Robustly, women opposed group-based hierarchy more than men did, and members of lower power ethnic/racial groups opposed group-based hierarchy more than members of higher power ethnic/racial groups did. As predicted by social dominance theory, gender differences were larger, more stable, and less variable from sample to sample than differences between ethnic/racial groups. Subordi- nate gender and ethnic/racial group members disagreed more with dominants in their views of group- based hierarchy in societies that can be considered more liberal and modem (e.g., emphasizing individ- ualism and change from traditions), as well as in societies that enjoyed greater gender equality. The relations between gender and ethnic/racial groups are discussed, and implications are developed for social dominance theory, social role theory, biosocial theory, social identity theory, system justification theory, realistic group conflict theory, and relative deprivation theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Responds to comments on an article related to the social dominance theory (SDT), published in the 2003 issue of the 'British Journal of Social Psychology.' Criticisms on the SDT; Depiction of concepts on SDT; Analysis of factors for the creation of gender inequality and arbitrary-set inequality.

The authors present archival evidence that men disproportionately hold occupational roles that enhance group-based inequality and that women disproportionately hold roles that attenuate group-based inequality. The authors found evidence for 3 processes that may contribute to this pattern: self-selection that is based on gender-linked differences in support for group inequality (social dominance orientation), hiring biases that are based on matching job applicants' group equality values with the hierarchy function of the job, and gender-stereotyped hiring biases. These processes were found across a number of occupations and participant variables. The social systems nature of these processes and the implications of the results for theoretical understandings of gender roles, social inequality, and theories of stereotyping are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study examined the asymmetry hypothesis of social dominance theory (SDT) in a work organization. The asymmetry hypothesis posits that members of subordinate groups who are high in social dominance orientation (SDO; desire for group-based hierarchy) can contribute to maintaining hierarchies by conforming with hierarchy-enhancing legitimizing myths and tactics used by members of dominant groups. Focusing on subordinates' perspective, we studied their compliance with supervisors' use of harsh power tactics, and whether this increased with subordinates' levels of SDO. At a hierarchy-enhancing for-profit organization, 207 subordinate employees self-reported their compliance with supervisor's use of harsh influence tactics and the perceived use of those tactics by their supervisors. The moderation analysis confirmed that the concurrence between supervisors' use of harsh power tactics, as perceived by subordinates, and subordinates' compliance with harsh tactics was moderated by subordinates' SDO. The higher SDO subordinates perceived a higher supervisor's use of harsh power tactics, the more they were willing to comply with those tactics. As the asymmetry hypothesis implies, this pattern can maintain hierarchies and even contribute to a spiral of inequalities within work environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study extends previous research on the influence of social dominance orientation (SDO) in international affairs by investigating the role of sociocognitive processes such as social identity complexity (SIC) and intergroup dehumanization in explaining the relationship between SDO and support for Arabs' autonomy. An Italian heterogeneous sample ( N = 123), in terms of gender, age, political orientation, religiosity, and income level, was considered. We expected that those low on SDO would be more likely to support Arabs' autonomy, would have higher SIC, and would be less likely to dehumanize Arabs. We also expected that SIC and dehumanization would sequentially mediate the relationship between SDO and support for Arabs' autonomy. Results revealed that Italians low on SDO have higher SIC (i.e., a more inclusive social identity) which endorses lower dehumanization of Arabs. This in turn explained the influence of SDO on support for Arabs' autonomy. These findings integrate the literature about SDO and SIC and enhance the understanding of the sociocognitive processes underlying people's support for international egalitarian movements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A new conceptualization and measurement of social dominance orientation--individual differences in the preference for group based hierarchy and inequality--is introduced. In contrast to previous measures of social dominance orientation that were designed to be unidimensional, the new measure (SDO?) embeds theoretically grounded subdimensions of SDO--SDO-Dominance (SDO-D) and SDO-Egalitarianism (SDO-E). SDO-D constitutes a preference for systems of group-based dominance in which high status groups forcefully oppress lower status groups. SDO-E constitutes a preference for systems of group-based inequality that are maintained by an interrelated network of subtle hierarchy-enhancing ideologies and social policies. Confirmatory factor and criterion validity analyses confirmed that SDO-D and SDO-E are theoretically distinct and dissociate in terms of the intergroup outcomes they best predict. For the first time, distinct personality and individual difference bases of SDO-D and SDO-E are outlined. We clarify the construct validity of SDO by strictly assessing a preference for dominance hierarchies in general, removing a possible confound relating to support for hierarchy benefitting the ingroup. Consistent with this, results show that among members of a disadvantaged ethnic minority group (African Americans), endorsement of SDO7 is inversely related to ingroup identity. We further demonstrate these effects using nationally representative samples of U.S. Blacks and Whites, documenting the generalizability of these findings. Finally, we introduce and validate a brief 4-item measure of each dimension. This article importantly extends our theoretical understanding of one of the most generative constructs in social psychology, and introduces powerful new tools for its measurement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Positive intergroup contact has been a guiding framework for research on reducing intergroup tension and for interventions aimed at that goal. We propose that beyond improving attitudes toward the out-group, positive contact affects disadvantaged-group members' perceptions of intergroup inequality in ways that can undermine their support for social change toward equality. In Study 1, participants were assigned to either high- or low-power experimental groups and then brought together to discuss either commonalities between the groups or intergroup differences. Commonality-focused contact, relative to difference-focused contact, produced heightened expectations for fair (i.e., egalitarian) out-group behavior among members of disadvantaged groups. These expectations, however, proved unrealistic when compared against the actions of members of the advantaged groups. Participants in Study 2 were Israeli Arabs (a disadvantaged minority) who reported the amount of positive contact they experienced with Jews. More positive intergroup contact was associated with increased perceptions of Jews as fair, which in turn predicted decreased support for social change. Implications for social change are considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]