scholarly journals On Self–Love and Outgroup Hate: Opposite Effects of Narcissism on Prejudice via Social Dominance Orientation and Right–Wing Authoritarianism

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 366-384 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Cichocka ◽  
Kristof Dhont ◽  
Arti P. Makwana ◽  
Mitja Back

Previous research has obtained mixed findings as to whether feelings of self–worth are positively or negatively related to right–wing ideological beliefs and prejudice. We propose to clarify the link between self–worth and ideology by distinguishing between narcissistic and non–narcissistic self–evaluations as well as between different dimensions of ideological attitudes. Four studies, conducted in three different socio–political contexts: the UK (Study 1, N = 422), the US (Studies 2 and 3, Ns = 471 and 289, respectively), and Poland (Study 4, N = 775), investigated the associations between narcissistic and non–narcissistic self–evaluations, social dominance orientation (SDO), right–wing authoritarianism (RWA), and ethnic prejudice. Confirming our hypotheses, the results consistently showed that after controlling for self–esteem, narcissistic self–evaluation was positively associated with SDO (accounting for RWA), yet negatively associated with RWA (accounting for SDO). These associations were similar after controlling for psychopathy and Machiavellianism (Study 3) as well as collective narcissism and Big Five personality characteristics (Study 4). Studies 2–4 additionally demonstrated that narcissistic self–evaluation was indirectly positively associated with prejudice through higher SDO (free of RWA) but indirectly negatively associated with prejudice through lower RWA (free of SDO). Implications for understanding the role of self–evaluation in right–wing ideological attitudes and prejudice are discussed. Copyright © 2017 The Authors. European Journal of Personality published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Association of Personality Psychology

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabrina J. Mayer ◽  
Carl C. Berning ◽  
David Johann

This paper offers an explanation of the link between grandiose narcissism and support for radical right parties. Drawing on representative data of the GESIS Panel ( N = 2827), focusing on support for the German radical right populist party Alternative for Germany in 2016 and treating grandiose narcissism as a two–dimensional concept, it is shown that the effects of grandiose narcissism are indirect rather than direct. The paper also reveals that it is mainly narcissistic rivalry that accounts for radical right party support, whereas narcissistic admiration has a protecting relationship. Finally, our results indicate that the indirect effects of narcissistic rivalry on radical right party support via right–wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation, respectively, are mediated by anti–immigrant sentiment. All in all, our results suggest that in studies on ideological orientations and voting behaviour, both dimensions of grandiose narcissism should be considered due to their contradictory relationship. Moreover, our findings indicate that the success of radical right parties might be the expression of personality dispositions of some parts of the electorate. © 2020 The Authors. European Journal of Personality published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Association of Personality Psychology


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha Stanley ◽  
Taciano L Milfont ◽  
Marc Wilson ◽  
Chris G Sibley

Social dominance orientation (SDO) and right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) are ideological attitudes that predict lower concern for the environment and less willingness to act on climate change. Research generally shows that SDO and RWA exhibit moderate, negative relationships with environmentalism. We examine the longitudinal influence of SDO and RWA on people’s willingness to change their behaviour to benefit the environment in a national probability sample over five years. We show that both ideological attitudes relate to lower environmentalism across time and that the SDO effect was stronger than the RWA effect, yet the association from environmentalism to later endorsement of SDO is stronger than the reverse. Interestingly, these findings suggest that the more likely temporal association flows from environmentalism to SDO.


Author(s):  
Emma Onraet ◽  
Alain Van Hiel ◽  
Barbara Valcke ◽  
Jasper Van Assche

Abstract The present study conducted in the Netherlands examines citizen's attitudes towards asylum seekers. We collected data in a large (N = 993) heterogeneous adult sample in November 2015, in the midst of the European “refugee crisis”. Our first aim was to map the reactions of citizens towards asylum seekers. Our second aim was to examine the role of right-wing ideological attitudes (i.e., Right-Wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation) in explaining these reactions. With respect to the first research aim, it was revealed that, on average, our respondents were rather unwilling to help asylum seekers. Moreover, respondents were more welcoming towards legitimate asylum seekers (who are on the run from war and violence in their home country) compared to economic asylum seekers. With respect to the second research aim, we found that right-wing attitudes were related to stronger negative reactions towards asylum seekers. Moreover, individuals higher on right-wing ideological attitudes were more likely to perceive asylum seekers as being economic asylum seekers and less as legitimate asylum seekers, which related to stronger feelings of threat and ultimately, to more negative reactions towards asylum seekers.


2004 ◽  
Vol 18 (6) ◽  
pp. 463-482 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bo Ekehammar ◽  
Nazar Akrami ◽  
Magnus Gylje ◽  
Ingrid Zakrisson

Whereas previous research has studied the relation of either (i) personality with prejudice, (ii) personality with social dominance orientation (SDO) and right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA), or (iii) SDO and RWA with prejudice, the present research integrates all approaches within the same model. In our study (N = 183), various causal models of the relationships among the Big Five, SDO, RWA, and Generalized Prejudice are proposed and tested. Generalized Prejudice scores were obtained from a factor analysis of the scores on various prejudice instruments (racism, sexism, prejudice toward homosexuals, and mentally disabled people), which yielded a one‐factor solution. The best‐fitting causal model, which was our suggested hypothetical model, showed that Big Five personality had no direct effect on Generalized Prejudice but an indirect effect transmitted through RWA and SDO, where RWA seems to capture personality aspects to a greater extent than SDO. Specifically, Generalized Prejudice was affected indirectly by Extraversion, Openness to Experience, and Conscientiousness through RWA, and by Agreeableness through SDO, whereas Neuroticism had no effect at all. The results are discussed against the background of previous research and the personality and social psychology approaches to the study of prejudice. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.


2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 550-567
Author(s):  
John R. Kerr ◽  
Marc S. Wilson

Previous research has highlighted how ideological factors such as political self-identification, religiosity and conspiracy thinking influence our beliefs about scientific issues such as climate change and vaccination. Across three studies (combined N = 9,022) we expand on this line of inquiry to show for the first time that the ideological attitudes relating to authoritarianism and group-based dominance predict disagreement with the scientific consensus in several scientific domains. We show these effects are almost entirely mediated by varying combinations of ideological (political ideology, religiosity, free-market endorsement, conspiracy thinking) and science-specific (scientific knowledge, trust in scientists) constructs, depending on the scientific issue in question. Importantly, a general distrust of science and scientists emerges as the most consistent mediator across different scientific domains. We find that, consistent with previous research, the ideological roots of rejection of science vary across scientific issues. However, we also show that these roots may share a common origin in ideological attitudes regarding authority and equality.


2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clara Cantal ◽  
Taciano L. Milfont ◽  
Marc S. Wilson ◽  
Valdiney V. Gouveia

Previous research within a dual–process cognitive–motivational theory of ideology and prejudice has indicated that dimensions of generalized prejudice are structured around attitudes towards dangerous, derogated and dissident groups, and that these prejudice dimensions are differentially predicted by the ideological attitudes of Right–Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO). However, to date, these findings have been restricted to New Zealand samples. We describe two studies examining whether the structure of prejudiced attitudes and the differential prediction by RWA and SDO replicate in the Brazilian context, incorporating context–relevant examples of each group—politicians, those from the northeast region of Brazil, and environmentalists. Results broadly supported the three–factor structure of dangerous, derogated, and dissident groups. Consistent with previous research, regression and structural equation analyses showed that RWA explained prejudice against dangerous groups, SDO explained prejudice against derogated groups, and both RWA and SDO explained prejudice against dissident groups. This research provides some evidence for the generalizability of the three–dimensional structure of generalized prejudice and differential prediction by RWA and SDO. Copyright © 2014 European Association of Personality Psychology


2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 406-420 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Kandler ◽  
Edward Bell ◽  
Rainer Riemann

Right–wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) are widely used constructs in research on social and political attitudes. This study examined their hierarchical and correlative structure (across sexes, generations and rater perspectives), as well as how genetic and environmental factors may contribute to individual differences in them (using different rater perspectives and nuclear twin family data). We found a substantive common aspect (beyond shared artificial variance arising from socially desirable responding) underlying both RWA and SDO: aggression against subordinate groups. We discussed how this aspect could help to explain the commonly reported correlation between the two concepts in Western countries. Estimates of genetic and environmental components in RWA and SDO based on self–reports were quite comparable with those based on peer reports. When controlling for error variance and taking assortative mating into account, individual differences in RWA were primarily due to genetic contributions including genotype–environment correlation, whereas variance in SDO was largely attributable to environmental sources shared and not shared by twins. The findings are discussed in terms of the utility of RWA and SDO as basic constructs to describe individual differences in social attitudes and with respect to the different patterns of genetic and environmental influences that underlie them. Copyright © 2016 European Association of Personality Psychology


2006 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 117-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nazar Akrami ◽  
Bo Ekehammar

Extending previous research on the relation of Big-Five personality with right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation, we examined the relationships of Big-Five facet scores rather than factor scores. The results (N = 332) of stepwise regression analyses showed that Openness to Experience was the only significant predictor of right-wing authoritarianism at the factor level, whereas Values and Ideas were significant predictors at the facet level. A similar analysis of social dominance orientation showed that Agreeableness and Openness to Experience contributed significantly to the prediction at the factor level, whereas Tender-Mindedness and Values were the best significant predictors at the facet level. The prediction based on facet scores was more accurate than the prediction based on factor scores. A random split of the sample confirmed the robustness of the findings. The results are discussed against the background of the personality and the social psychology approaches to explaining individual differences in prejudice.


2014 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Russell J. Webster ◽  
Mason D. Burns ◽  
Margot Pickering ◽  
Donald A. Saucier

Politically conservative (versus liberal) individuals generally report more prejudice towards various low–status out–groups. Three studies examined whether prejudice suppression factors—specifically, internal and external motivation to suppress (IMS and EMS, respectively) prejudice—can help explain the relationship between political orientation and prejudice. Study 1 showed that IMS and EMS partially mediated the relationship between political orientation and affective prejudice towards Arabs. Study 2 demonstrated that when justification [right–wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation] and suppression (IMS and EMS) factors are simultaneously tested as mediators, only RWA partially mediated the relationship between political orientation and prejudice towards deviant (e.g. gay men) out–groups, whereas RWA and IMS fully mediated the relationship between political orientation and prejudice towards derogated out–groups (e.g. Blacks). Intriguingly, IMS rendered social dominance orientation effects non–significant for derogated out–groups. Study 3 showed that anticipating an out–group interaction (with a Black or lesbian confederate) diminished the mediational contribution of IMS in the political orientation–prejudice relationship because of increased IMS among participants; yet the increases in IMS did not completely eliminate differences in prejudice as a function of political orientation. Ultimately, these three studies demonstrate that suppression (in addition to justification) factors do help explain the relationship between political orientation and prejudice. Copyright © 2013 European Association of Personality Psychology.


2001 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick C. L. Heaven ◽  
Sandra Bucci

Although both right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) have been found to predict racial and intergroup prejudice, previous research has suggested that RWA and SDO have quite distinct psychological features. We therefore examined the Big Five personality correlates of these two measures using facet scales from the International Personality Item Pool measure. Respondents were 220 university undergraduate volunteers. Significant sex differences were noted with respect to SDO and some facet scales. A series of analyses supported the view that RWA and SDO are aligned with different personality traits, while the discussion centred on the psychological profile of authoritarians and dominators. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document