The social dominance orientation in adolescence: the role of gender identity and stereotypical male and female traits / La orientación a la dominancia social en la adolescencia: el papel de la identidad de género y los rasgos estereotípicos femeninos y masculinos

2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 241-263 ◽  
Author(s):  
María Aranda ◽  
Beatriz Montes-Berges ◽  
María-Rosario Castillo-Mayén
Keyword(s):  
Gender Identity ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Male And Female ◽  
The Social

Social Dominance Orientation and Discrimination against People with Schizophrenia: Evidence of Medicalization and Dangerousness Beliefs as Legitimizing Myths

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dimitrios Lampropoulos ◽  
Thémis Apostolidis
Keyword(s):  
Social Distance ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Structural Equation ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Equation Modeling ◽  
Social Dominance Theory ◽  
Modeling Analysis ◽  
The Social ◽  
Humanities Students

AbstractMedicalizing beliefs about schizophrenia (biogenetic causes and psychiatric labels) are connected to the belief that people with schizophrenia are dangerous and to discriminating intentions towards them. In this research, we draw on the Social Dominance theory and we examine these beliefs as legitimizing myths that are connected to the individuals’ social dominance orientation (SDO) and that legitimize discrimination. In total, 238 Humanities students participated in the current research (Mage = 20.4; SD = 3.03; 107 male and 131 female). A vignette presenting a person with schizophrenia symptoms that offered no labels or explanations about the depicted person’s condition was presented to research participants. A structural equation modeling analysis was carried out, in order to confirm our hypotheses in accordance with social dominance theory. Participants’ social dominance orientation (SDO) was associated with higher endorsement of medicalizing (β = .16, p < .01) and dangerousness beliefs (β = .22, p < .001). In turn, medicalizing beliefs were connected to dangerousness (β = .21, p < .001) and higher discriminating intentions, both for desired social distance (β = .15, p < .05) and for deprivation of sociopolitical rights (β = .14, p < .05). Dangerousness was highly associated with both these measures (β = .28, p < .001 and β = 43, p < .001 respectively) while SDO was not significantly associated with discriminating intentions. Our model showed good fit to the data. This study confirms the role of SDO in schizophrenia stigma and the fact that ideological and power factors underpin the stigma of schizophrenia.

scholarly journals Individual Differences in Perception of Sexual Harassment in University Students

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deirbhile Malone ◽  
Cillian McHugh
Keyword(s):  
Locus Of Control ◽  
Sexual Harassment ◽  
Gender Identity ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Mediation Analyses ◽  
Significant Direct Effect

Sexual harassment has increasingly become a main topic of conversation in academia in recent years. This current study investigated the role of gender, gender identity, locus of control and social dominance orientation on perceptions of sexual harassment. 121 undergraduate students (60 females and 61 males) were presented with four questionnaires. A hierarchical multiple regression and mediation analyses were conducted to examine the data. Results indicated that women perceived a higher occurrence of sexually harassing behaviour than men. Gender identity and locus of control were not found to be significant predictors of perception of sexual harassment. Mediation analyses showed that there was a significant direct effect of social dominance orientation on the perception of sexual harassment with individuals who measured high in social dominance orientation interpreting less scenarios as sexually harassing while those exhibiting low social dominance orientation were more likely to perceive sexual harassment. With limited previous research identifying the role of social dominance orientation in the perception of sexual harassment, future studies should further examine this individual difference in a range of settings including workplace and third level education. Limitations of this study and recommendations for future research is outlined.

scholarly journals Cruelty and indifference are the point: Preference for hierarchy is related to support for policies that harm marginalized groups through feeling both less empathy and more schadenfreude

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sa-kiera Tiarra Jolynn Hudson ◽  
Mina Cikara ◽  
Jim Sidanius
Keyword(s):  
Social Dominance ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Emotional Reactions ◽  
Policy Support ◽  
Intergroup Conflict ◽  
Social Emotions ◽  
Marginalized Groups ◽  
The Social ◽  
Initial Support

Individuals who have relatively higher levels of social dominance orientation (SDO; Ho et al., 2015) are more likely to support policies and engage in behaviors that harm marginalized groups through both passive (e.g., neglect) and active (e.g., subjugation) means. While SDO is positioned as a relevant antecedent to outcomes regarding intergroup conflict, the mechanisms by which SDO impact group harm are underspecified. In this paper we investigate the social emotions of intergroup empathy and schadenfreude—the congruent negative and incongruent positive emotional reactions, respectively, a person has in response to the suffering of members from another social group—as key mediators between SDO and intergroup harm. More specifically, we test a model in which SDO leads to active harm primarily through feeling schadenfreude while SDO leads to passive harm primarily through not feeling empathy. In four pre-registered studies (N = 3,468), we show initial support for this model, as SDO’s associations with actively harmful policy support were more strongly mediated through schadenfreude than empathy, while SDO’s associations with passively harmful policy support were more strongly mediated through empathy than schadenfreude. We discuss the relevance of these findings to intergroup conflict interventions more broadly, as well as highlight the role of schadenfreude in motivating intergroup harm.

scholarly journals Ambivalent Speciesism Scale: Development, Validity and Reliability

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (18) ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Animal Rights ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Animal Ethics ◽  
High Reliability ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
The Social ◽  
Orientation Scale ◽  
Animal Use

The aim of this study is to develop a scale compatible with current animal ethics studies to measure the phenomenon of speciesism, that is marginalization of animals and prejudice and discrimination against animals. In order to develop the Ambivalent Speciesism Scale, an item pool was created by examining the animal ethics literature and social psychology studies on human-animal relations, and then the items were edited by taking the opinions of people studying animal rights and experts in measurement and evaluation in psychology. The scale is designed in 7-point Likert type. The trial form was applied to the participants together with the Speciesism Scale, the Social Dominance Orientation Scale and the Basic Empathy Scale. Participants were selected from individuals representing different lifestyles in the context of animal use, using the snowball sampling technique. The study was conducted with 288 participants; 64 men, 217 women and, 7 of whom are not of both genders. While there were 24 items in the trial form of the scale, nine of these items were eliminated as a result of the factor analysis. The final form of the scale with 15 items has a high reliability (.90). The items of the scale are divided into three dimensions: belief in human superiority, protective speciesism, and speciesism in language. It was determined that the scores obtained from the scale were in positive correlation with the scores obtained from the other scale measuring speciesism and the social dominance orientation scale, as expected. The scores obtained from the scale are distributed as expected among the groups that include lifestyles related to animal use. These data were evaluated as findings showing the validity of the scale. Keywords Speciesism, ambivalent speciesism scale, animal rights, discrimination, animal ethics

scholarly journals Experiments in political psychology

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyle Fischer ◽  
Quentin Atkinson ◽  
Ananish Chaudhuri
Keyword(s):  
Social Dominance ◽  
Political Ideology ◽  
Ultimatum Game ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
Right Wing Authoritarianism ◽  
The Social ◽  
Orientation Scale ◽  
The Right ◽  
Social Conservatism

This chapter provides an overview of studies that use incentivised experiments to study political ideology. We look first at studies that conceptualise political ideology along a unidimensional liberal-conservative spectrum and explore whether there are behavioural differences between liberals and conservatives. While recent studies find that liberals display more pro-sociality, many other studies find that liberals and conservatives display similar levels of pro-social, ingroup-biased, normative, and punitive behaviour. We then turn to experiments that study two-dimensional political ideology as embodied in the concepts of economic conservatism/progressivism (often measured with the Social Dominance Orientation scale) and social conservatism/progressivism (usually measured with the Right-Wing Authoritarianism scale). In such experiments, economic conservatives display lower levels of pro-sociality and universalism and greater tolerance of inequality and tendencies to harm outgroups. Social conservatives tend to display “groupishness”, including distrusting anonymous strangers, cooperating with ingroup members, following rules, punishing in the ultimatum game, and sometimes harming outgroups.

scholarly journals Increased Conformity to Social Hierarchy Under Public Eyes

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daeeun Kim ◽  
JuYoung Kim ◽  
Hackjin Kim
Keyword(s):  
Social Status ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Social Rank ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Social Hierarchy ◽  
Negative Evaluation ◽  
Fear Of Negative Evaluation ◽  
The Public ◽  
Individual Preferences ◽  
The Social

Why would people conform more to others with higher social positions? People may place higher confidence in the opinions of those who rank higher in the social hierarchy, or they may wish to make better impressions on people of higher social status. We investigated how individual preferences for novel stimuli are influenced by the preferences of others in the social hierarchy and whether anonymity affects such preference changes. After manipulation of their social rank, participants were asked to indicate how much they liked or disliked a series of images. Then, they were shown the rating given to each image by a partner (either inferior or superior in social rank) and were given a chance to adjust their ratings. The participants were more likely to change their preferences to match those of a superior partner in the public vs. private condition. The tendency to conform to the views of the superior partner was stronger among those with higher social dominance orientation (SDO) and those with greater fear of negative evaluation (FNE) by others. Altogether, the findings suggest that the motivation to make better impressions on people of higher social status can be the major driver of conformity to others with higher social positions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document