The Nature of Social Dominance Orientation: Introducing the Social Dominance Orientation7 Scale

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arnold K. Ho ◽  
Jim Sidanius ◽  
Nour Kteily ◽  
Jennifer Sheehy-Skeffington ◽  
Felicia Pratto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Dominance ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
The Social

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.

scholarly journals Orientasi Dominasi Sosial dengan Kekerasan dalam Pacaran pada Remaja

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 121-129
Author(s):  
Rema Vara Indry Dubu ◽  
M. Dinah Ch. Lerik ◽  
R. Pasifikus Christa Wijaya ◽  
Luh Putu Ruliati
Keyword(s):  
Dating Violence ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Positive Relationship ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Correlation Technique ◽  
Dating Relationships ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Dating Relationship

Abstract. This study aims to know the relationship between social dominance orientation with dating violence in adolescents. The hypothesis is that there is a positive relationship between social dominance orientation with dating violence in adolescents. Participants in this study were 400 adolescents in Kupang City (200 girls dan 200 boys) using convenience sampling. This research uses the quantitative approach with  Social Dominanca Orientation7 (ODS7) adaptation scale and Conflict in Adolescent Dating Relationships Inventory (CADRI) adaptation scale as data collection methods. The hypotesys’s result using Spearman correlation technique obtained that correlation coefficient in this study is 0,102 with a significance level is 0,042 (p < 0,05). The data shows that there is a significant positive relationship between the social dominance orientation with dating violence in adolescents in Kupang city. It means that the higher social dominance orientation of adolescent, the higher tendency to commit violence in dating relationship, and vice versa. Keywords: Social Dominance Orientation, Dating Violence, Adolescent

Collaboration in the context of integration: a Social Dominance Experiment

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernard M Groen
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Study ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Social Care ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Care Integration ◽  
The Social ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
Empathy Scale ◽  
The Creation

How does one go about asking for opinions from participants about ‘health and social care integration’? As this ‘concept of integration’ is relatively vague and ambiguous. Indeed, in an earlier project we found that people that work in the social care sector really favoured closer collaboration, whereas healthcare colleagues really did not care much about such collaboration. This impression is merely anecdotal in nature, how does one tease out an individual’s preference for collaboration. In short, we have decided to use the empathy scale from the well- established Social Dominance Orientation scales, to use as a proxy for ‘willingness to collaborate’. Essentially, the assumption made here is; if a participant indicates a higher level of empathy then they are more likely to collaborate with others. It follows from this assumption that those more likely to collaborate are more like to want to integrate. It is this logic that has been applied to the creation of this experiment and we anticipate that this will be a contentious point. We would like to point out that, even though on its own, this may be a precarious assumption to make. However, this experimental study should be seen in light of the wider dissertation and the wider study design context in which it operates.

Authoritarianism, Social Dominance, and Prejudice Among Junior Police Officers

2012 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 61-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juliette Gatto ◽  
Michaël Dambrun
Keyword(s):  
Police Officers ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Structural Equation ◽  
Reference Group ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Equation Modeling ◽  
Projection Model ◽  
Right Wing Authoritarianism ◽  
Social Projection ◽  
The Social

The aim of this study was to determine the respective impact of group socialization and social projection to explain prejudice among newly recruited police officers (N = 301). The first approach predicts that both right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO), two fundamental determinants of prejudice, should be driven by specific norms. The second approach predicts that the perceived norms of the reference group reflect the social projection of our own attitudes and norms. These two models were tested with structural equation modeling. Emphasizing the determinant role of social norms and social influence, the results provide stronger support for the group socialization model (GSM) than the social projection model (SPM).

scholarly journals Common Ideological Roots of Speciesism and Generalized Ethnic Prejudice: The Social Dominance Human–Animal Relations Model (SD–HARM)

2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 507-522 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristof Dhont ◽  
Gordon Hodson ◽  
Ana C. Leite
Keyword(s):  
Social Dominance ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Positive Association ◽  
Significant Positive Association ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Ethnic Prejudice ◽  
The Social ◽  
Analytic Integration ◽  
Key Factor ◽  
Human Animal

Recent research and theorizing suggest that desires for group–based dominance underpin biases towards both human outgroups and (non–human) animals. A systematic study of the common ideological roots of human–human and human–animal biases is, however, lacking. Three studies (in Belgium, UK, and USA) tested the Social Dominance Human–Animal Relations Model (SD–HARM) proposing that Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) is a key factor responsible for the significant positive association between ethnic outgroup attitudes and speciesist attitudes towards animals, even after accounting for other ideological variables (that possibly confound previous findings). Confirming our hypotheses, the results consistently demonstrated that SDO, more than right–wing authoritarianism (RWA), is a key factor connecting ethnic prejudice and speciesist attitudes. Furthermore, Studies 2 and 3 showed that both SDO and RWA are significantly related to perceived threat posed by vegetarianism (i.e. ideologies and diets minimizing harm to animals), but with SDO playing a focal role in explaining the positive association between threat perceptions and ethnic prejudice. Study 3 replicated this pattern, additionally including political conservatism in the model, itself a significant correlate of speciesism. Finally, a meta–analytic integration across studies provided robust support for SD–HARM and offers important insights into the psychological parallels between human intergroup and human–animal relations. Copyright © 2016 European Association of Personality Psychology

scholarly journals Relation between College Students’ Conservatism and Negative Stereotypes about Social Groups

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. 224
Author(s):  
Sylvia Beyer
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Political Attitudes ◽  
Social Groups ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Just World ◽  
Negative Stereotypes ◽  
Religious Minorities ◽  
The Social ◽  
Two Measures

This study examined the interrelations among political attitudes and negative stereotypes in U.S. undergraduates. Participants answered questions measuring conservatism, social dominance orientation, Global Belief in a Just World, and religiosity. This research employed two measures of stereotypes: modern sexism and feelings about 15 social groups. It was hypothesized that conservatives would show more evidence of negative stereotypes than liberals would. The study revealed that indeed conservatives show stronger evidence of negative stereotypes, but that liberals also harbor some biases. Importantly, the social groups against whom conservatives and liberals are stereotyped differed greatly. Conservatives showed considerably more negative stereotypes against racial and religious minorities, and particularly against those who do not identify with the cis-gender, heterosexual norm. Thus, the targets of conservatives’ stereotypes were groups that have traditionally been subject to discrimination. Liberals held stronger stereotypes against groups that are more politically powerful, such as Caucasians and Christians.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document