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.

scholarly journals Social Dominance Orientation Boosts Collective Action Among Low-Status Groups

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catarina L. Carvalho ◽  
Isabel R. Pinto ◽  
Rui Costa-Lopes ◽  
Darío Páez ◽  
Mariana P. Miranda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Collective Action ◽  
Social Structure ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
High Status ◽  
Collective Actions ◽  
The Social ◽  
Group Members ◽  
Status Enhancement

We propose that low-status group members' support for group-based hierarchy and inequality (i.e., social dominance orientation; SDO) may represent an ideological strategy to guarantee the legitimacy of future ingroup status-enhancement. Specifically, we argue that, under unstable social structure conditions, SDO serves as an ideological justification for collective action tendencies aimed at competing for a higher status. In such context, SDO should be positively related with actions aimed to favor the ingroup (i.e., collective actions) by increasing group members' motivation to engage in direct competition with a relevant higher-status outgroup. We conducted two studies under highly competitive and unstable social structure contexts using real life groups. In Study 1 (N = 77), we induced Low vs. High Ingroup (University) Status and in Study 2 (N = 220) we used competing sports groups. Overall, results showed that, among members of low-status groups, SDO consistently increased individuals' motivation to get involved in actions favoring the ingroup, by boosting their motivation to compete with the opposing high-status outgroup. We discuss the results in light of the social dominance and collective action framework.

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.

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 Climate change threats increase modern racism as a function of social dominance orientation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatih Uenal ◽  
Jim Sidanius ◽  
Jon Roozenbeek ◽  
Sander van der Linden
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Collective Action ◽  
Social Dominance ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Intergroup Threat ◽  
Modern Racism ◽  
Threat Perceptions ◽  
Ingroup Identification ◽  
Threat Cues

Processing information on the negative consequences of climate change can have unrelated side-effects such as increased outgroup derogation. Previous research suggests differing theoretical explanations for these “spill-over” effects such as buffering existential anxiety. Here, we test and compare two alternative explanations based on social dominance theory and the group-based control model. Across two pre-registered experiments (N = 1031; USA & UK), we examine whether social dominance orientation (SDO) and/or ingroup identification moderate the relationship between experimentally induced collective threats (i.e., climate change and intergroup threat) and subjective threat perceptions, modern racism, and pro-environmental collective action support. In Study 1, SDO and ingroup identification were measured 2 years prior to our experiment as antecedents of threat perceptions. Our results suggest that informing individuals about negative consequences of climate change (e.g., wildfires, floods, resource scarcity, health etc.), leads to higher intergroup threat perceptions and modern racism. These spill-over effects, in turn, are moderated by SDO but not by ingroup identification. In Study 2, we successfully replicate our findings, measuring SDO and ingroup identification directly after the threat manipulation. Moreover, we use a behavioral measure of pro-environmental collective action to assess more direct stimuli-responses. In Study 2, again, we show that SDO moderates the spill-over effects. In contrast, ingroup identification showed only marginally significant spill-over effect moderation and did not increase in response to experimental threat-cues. Notably, we also find that intergroup threat-cues generalize onto higher climate change threat perceptions. No effects on behavioral collective action support were found.

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.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document