scholarly journals The influence of cooperation and competition on preschoolers' prosociality toward in-group and out-group members

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 202171
Author(s):  
Theo Toppe ◽  
Susanne Hardecker ◽  
Franca Zerres ◽  
Daniel B. M. Haun
Keyword(s):  
Social Dominance ◽  
Social Inclusion ◽  
Group Membership ◽  
Social Groups ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Past Research ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Children’S Behaviour ◽  
Prosocial Behaviours ◽  
Group Member

Past research suggests that children favour their in-group members over out-group members as indicated by selective prosociality such as sharing or social inclusion. This preregistered study examined how playing a cooperative, competitive or solitary game influences German 4- to 6-year-olds’ in-group bias and their general willingness to act prosocially, independent of the recipient's group membership ( N = 144). After playing the game, experimenters introduced minimal groups and assessed children's sharing with an in-group and an out-group member as well as their social inclusion of an out-group member into an in-group interaction. Furthermore, we assessed children's physical engagement and parents' social dominance orientation (SDO)—a scale indicating the preference for inequality among social groups—to learn more about inter-individual differences in children's prosocial behaviours. Results suggest that children showed a stronger physical engagement while playing competitively as compared with cooperatively or alone. The different gaming contexts did not impact children's subsequent in-group bias or general willingness to act prosocially. Parental SDO was not linked to children's prosocial behaviours. These results indicate that competition can immediately affect children's behaviour while playing but raise doubt on the importance of cooperative and competitive play for children's subsequent intergroup and prosocial behaviour.

scholarly journals Preference for hierarchy is associated with reduced empathy and increased counter-empathy towards others, especially out-group targets

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sa-kiera Tiarra Jolynn Hudson ◽  
Mina Cikara ◽  
Jim Sidanius
Keyword(s):  
Social Dominance ◽  
Group Membership ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Group Setting ◽  
Group Boundaries ◽  
The World ◽  
History Of ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Prejudicial Attitudes ◽  
Status Differences

The capacity to empathize with others facilitates prosocial behavior. People’s willingness and capacity to empathize, however, is often contingent upon the target’s group membership – people are less empathic towards those they categorize as out-group members. In competitive or threatening intergroup contexts, people may even feel pleasure (counter-empathy) in response to out-group members’ misfortunes. Social dominance orientation (SDO), or the extent to which people prefer and promote group-based inequalities, is an ideological variable that is associated with a competitive view of the world, increased prejudicial attitudes, and decreased empathy. Thus, higher levels of SDO should be associated with reduced empathy and increased counter-empathy in general, but especially towards those whose subjugation maintains group inequalities. Across three studies we show that among White individuals, higher SDO levels are associated with less empathy, and more counter-empathy in response to others’ good and bad fortunes. More importantly, these reductions in empathy and increases in schadenfreude as a function of SDO were significantly stronger for Asian and Black targets than for in-group White targets when group boundaries were made salient prior to the empathy ratings. Finally, in a fourth study we show that this phenomenon is not dependent upon a history of status differences: higher SDO scores were associated with decreased empathy and increased counter-empathy for competitive out-group (relative to in-group) targets in a novel group setting. We discuss implications of these effects for hierarchy maintenance.

A quantitative and qualitative analysis of social dominance orientation and race-related comments

2014 ◽  
Vol 34 (7/8) ◽  
pp. 531-544 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aneika L. Simmons ◽  
Rochelle Parks-Yancy
Keyword(s):  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
High Status ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Status Group ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Group Member ◽  
Influence Perceptions

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to determine how social dominance orientation (SDO) might influence perceptions of bias when the race of the offender and the target of the biased comment is either white or black. Design/methodology/approach – This investigation was conducted in a laboratory with undergraduate students. Findings – In a study utilizing American student participants, the authors found that when an individual is high in SDO they are more likely to perceive racism/stereotyping when a low-status group member (i.e. African-American) makes a racially biased comment about high-status group members (i.e. Caucasian). Originality/value – The authors determined the influence of SDO on the perception of racial comments regarding African-Americans and Caucasians. These findings are also unique in that the authors manipulate the authority (i.e. status) of the offender and target.

System Justification or Social Dominance? A Multilevel Test of the Ideological Motivators of Perceived Discrimination

2021 ◽  
pp. 014616722110360
Author(s):  
Joaquín Bahamondes ◽  
Chris G. Sibley ◽  
Danny Osborne
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Perceived Discrimination ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
System Justification ◽  
Societal Implications ◽  
Reverse Discrimination ◽  
High Status ◽  
Majority Group ◽  
Group Members

Although system-justifying beliefs often mitigate perceptions of discrimination, status-based asymmetries in the ideological motivators of perceived discrimination are unknown. Because the content and societal implications of discrimination claims are status-dependant, social dominance orientation (SDO) should motivate perceptions of (reverse) discrimination among members of high-status groups, whereas system justification should motivate the minimization of perceived discrimination among the disadvantaged. We tested these hypotheses using multilevel regressions among a nationwide random sample of New Zealand Europeans ( n = 29,169) and ethnic minorities ( n = 5,118). As hypothesized, group-based dominance correlated positively with perceived (reverse) discrimination among ethnic-majority group members, whereas system justification correlated negatively with perceived discrimination among the disadvantaged. Furthermore, the proportion of minorities within the region strengthened the victimizing effects of SDO-Dominance, but not SDO-Egalitarianism, among the advantaged. Together, these results reveal status-based asymmetries in the motives underlying perceptions of discrimination and identify a key contextual moderator of this association.

Copy the In-group: Group Membership Trumps Perceived Reliability, Warmth, and Competence in a Social-Learning Task

2021 ◽  
pp. 095679762110322
Author(s):  
Marcel Montrey ◽  
Thomas R. Shultz
Keyword(s):  
Social Learning ◽  
Cultural Evolution ◽  
Learning Strategy ◽  
Group Membership ◽  
Social Groups ◽  
Learning Task ◽  
Minimal Group Paradigm ◽  
Learning Game ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Cumulative Cultural Evolution

Surprisingly little is known about how social groups influence social learning. Although several studies have shown that people prefer to copy in-group members, these studies have failed to resolve whether group membership genuinely affects who is copied or whether group membership merely correlates with other known factors, such as similarity and familiarity. Using the minimal-group paradigm, we disentangled these effects in an online social-learning game. In a sample of 540 adults, we found a robust in-group-copying bias that (a) was bolstered by a preference for observing in-group members; (b) overrode perceived reliability, warmth, and competence; (c) grew stronger when social information was scarce; and (d) even caused cultural divergence between intermixed groups. These results suggest that people genuinely employ a copy-the-in-group social-learning strategy, which could help explain how inefficient behaviors spread through social learning and how humans maintain the cultural diversity needed for cumulative cultural evolution.

scholarly journals Parochial Versus Universal Cooperation: Introducing a Novel Economic Game of Within- and Between-Group Interaction

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hillie Aaldering ◽  
Robert Böhm
Keyword(s):  
Social Dominance ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Intergroup Conflict ◽  
Social Value Orientation ◽  
Group Interactions ◽  
Group Relations ◽  
Group Cooperation ◽  
Group Members ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Natural Groups

Engaging in personally costly within-group cooperation benefits one’s in-group members but also impacts other groups by benefiting, neglecting, or harming out-group members, leading to a range of potential consequences for between-group relations (e.g., collaboration vs. competition). We introduce the Intergroup Parochial and Universal Cooperation (IPUC) game to investigate the prevalence of the individual preferences underlying these different expressions of within-group cooperation: universalism, weak parochialism, and strong parochialism. In two online experiments with natural groups, we show that the IPUC has value beyond existing economic games in measuring these preferences separately. In a third experiment conducted in the lab, we show how dispositional measures traditionally associated with within- and between-group cooperation, that is, social value orientation, social dominance orientation, honesty-humility, and empathic concern, predict different preferences. Thus, the IPUC provides a tool to better understand within- and between-group interactions and to test interventions to overcome intergroup conflict.

scholarly journals Intergroup Discrimination in Cooperation Among Moral and Non-Moral Groups

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-33
Author(s):  
Hirotaka Imada ◽  
Daniel Codd ◽  
Daqing Liu
Keyword(s):  
Group Membership ◽  
Moral Values ◽  
Group Cooperation ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Group Member

In-group favouritism is ubiquitous and previous studies have consistently found that individuals cooperate more with in-group members than out-group members in diverse contexts. Yet, there has not been much research on the role of the nature of groups in intergroup cooperation. A recent study found stronger levels of in-group favouritism amongst groups formed on the basis of shared moral values. However, it remained unclear whether the increased favouritism was caused by a greater tendency to act favourably towards the in-group or derogatorily towards the out-group. The present study thus investigated intergroup cooperation among morality-based and non-morality-based groups and examined the levels of cooperation with an in-group member and an out-group member as compared to a person whose group membership was unknown. Regardless of how groups were formed, in-group favouritism was present, while out-group derogation was absent. Furthermore, we found that the shared morality promoted in-group cooperation indirectly via low perceived out-group warmth. Our study provides further evidence that in-group favouring behaviour does not include derogating out-groups and points to the importance of further investigation into the role of the shared morality in intergroup cooperation.

The selection of leaders and social dominance orientation

2015 ◽  
Vol 34 (10) ◽  
pp. 1211-1226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aneika L. Simmons ◽  
Elizabeth E. Umphress
Keyword(s):  
Social Dominance ◽  
Business Students ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Leadership Role ◽  
High Status ◽  
Leadership Position ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Status Group ◽  
Group Member ◽  
Selection Of

Purpose – Individuals who are high in social dominance orientation (SDO) tend to endorse the belief that members of traditionally considered high-status groups should dominate members of traditionally considered low-status groups within society. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how SDO influences the selection of an individual who is a member of a traditionally considered low-status group for a leadership position as opposed to a non-leadership position. Design/methodology/approach – The methodology included undergraduate business students who were investigated in a laboratory setting. Findings – Results indicate that individuals who are high in SDO are more likely to discriminate against the most qualified candidate who is a traditionally considered low-status group member when compared to those low in SDO, and job position moderated this outcome. This effect was stronger when selecting the traditionally considered low-status group member candidate for a leadership role as opposed to a non-leadership position. Originality/value – To the knowledge of the authors, this is the first investigation to examine both leadership and selection using social dominance theory as a theoretical framework. Further, this is the first empirical analysis to determine that the influence of SDO is stronger when an individual high in SDO is selecting a traditionally considered low-status group member for a leadership position as opposed to a non-leadership position.

scholarly journals Support for group-based inequality among members of low-status groups as an ingroup status-enhancement strategy

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Catarina L. Carvalho ◽  
Isabel R. Pinto ◽  
Rui Costa-Lopes ◽  
Darío Paéz ◽  
José M. Marques
Keyword(s):  
Collective Action ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Contextual Factors ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
High Status ◽  
Status Group ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Ingroup Identification ◽  
Minimal Groups ◽  
Status Enhancement

We discuss the idea that competition-based motives boost low-status group members’ support for group-based hierarchy and inequality. Specifically, the more low-status group members feel motivated to compete with a relevant high-status outgroup, based on the belief that existing status positions may be reversed, the more they will defend status differentials (i.e., high social dominance orientation; SDO). Using minimal groups (N = 113), we manipulated ingroup (low vs. high) status, and primed unstable status positions to all participants. As expected, we found that SDO positively mediates the relation between ingroup identification and collective action, when ingroup’s status is perceived to be low and status positions are perceived as highly unstable. We discuss the implications of considering situational and contextual factors to better understand individuals’ support for group-based hierarchies and inequality, and the advantages of considering ideological processes in predicting collective action.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document