Social Justice Research

, Volume 23, Issue 2–3, pp 117–155 | Cite as

Group-Based Dominance and Opposition to Equality Correspond to Different Psychological Motives

Article

Abstract

Social Dominance Orientation, one of the most popular individual differences measures in the study of generalized prejudice, can be understood as having two components: Opposition to Equality (OEQ) and support for Group-Based Dominance (GBD). We consider these components in terms of system justification theory and social identity theory. We find that each component best explains different kinds of political views, consistent with the theory that they arise from different motivations. OEQ reflects system justification motives. It better predicts attitudes towards redistributive social policy, political conservatism, and a lack of humanitarian compassion for the disadvantaged. GBD reflects social identity motives. It is more associated with hostility toward outgroups and concerns about intergroup competition. GBD and OEQ have different personality and demographic correlates, exhibit distinctive relations with explicit and implicit attitudinal preferences, and differentially predict a variety of policy attitudes. Use of GBD and OEQ as separate constructs enriches the understanding of prejudice, policy attitudes, and political ideology.

Keywords

Social Dominance Orientation Political psychology Prejudice Authoritarianism Social identity System justification 

References

  1. Altemeyer, B. (1996). The authoritarian specter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Altemeyer, B. (1998). The other “authoritarian personality”. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 30, pp. 47–92). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  3. Altemeyer, R. (2006). The authoritarians. Lulu. http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/
  4. Ashburn-Nardo, L., Knowles, M. L., & Monteith, M. J. (2003). Black Americans’ implicit racial associations and their implications for intergroup judgment. Social Cognition, 21, 61–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bègue, L., & Bastounis, M. (2003). Two spheres of belief in justice: Extensive support for the bidimensional model of belief in a just world. Journal of Personality, 71, 435–463.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bobo, L., & Klugel, J. R. (1993). Opposition to race-targeting: Self-interest, stratification ideology, or racial attitudes? American Sociological Review, 58, 443–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brockner, J., Ackerman, G., Greenberg, J., Gelfand, M. J., Francesco, A. M., Chen, Z. X., et al. (2001). Culture and procedural justice: The influence of power distance on reactions to voice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 300–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306–307.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Caricati, L. (2007). The relationship between social dominance orientation and gender: The mediating role of social values. Sex Roles, 57, 159–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cohrs, J. C., Moschner, B., Maes, J., & Kielmann, S. (2005). The motivational bases of Right-Wing Authoritarianism and social dominance orientation: Relations to values and attitudes in the aftermath of September 11, 2001. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1425–1434.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Crawford, M. T., & Skowronski, J. J. (1998). When motivated thought leads to heightened bias: High need for cognition can enhance the impact of stereotypes on memory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 1075–1088.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dalbert, C., Lipkus, I. M., Sallay, H., & Goch, I. (2001). A just and an unjust world: Structure and validity of different world beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 561–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Duckitt, J. (2001). A dual process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 33, pp. 41–113). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  14. Duckitt, J. (2006). Differential effects of Right-Wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation on outgroup attitudes and their mediation by threat from competitiveness to outgroups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 684–696.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Duckitt, J., & Sibley, C. G. (2007). Right wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation and the dimensions of generalized prejudice. European Journal of Personality, 21, 113–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Eagly, A. H., Diekman, A. B., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & Koenig, A. M. (2004). Gender gaps in sociopolitical attitudes: A social psychological analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 796–816.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Ekehammar, B., Akrami, N., Gylje, M., & Zakrisson, I. (2004). What matters most to prejudice: Big five personality, social dominance orientation, or Right-Wing Authoritarianism? European Journal of Personality, 18, 463–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Esping-Andersen, G. (1990). The three worlds of welfare capitalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Farley, R., Steeh, C., Jackson, T., & Reeves, K. (1994). Stereotypes and segregation: Neighborhoods in the Detroit area. American Journal of Sociology, 100, 750–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Freemen, D., Aquino, K., & McFerran, B. (2009). Overcoming beneficiary race as an impediment to charitable donations: Social dominance orientation, the experience of moral elevation, and donation behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 72–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Garcia, D. M., Desmarais, S., Branscombe, N. R., & Gee, S. S. (2005). Opposition to redistributive employment policies for women: The role of policy experience and group interest. British Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 583–602.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Gilens, M. (1999). Why Americans hate welfare: Race, media, and the politics of antipoverty policy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  23. Gleser, L. J., & Olkin, I. (1994). Stochastically dependent effect sizes. In H. M. Cooper & L. V. Hedges (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 339–355). New York: Sage.Google Scholar
  24. Guimond, S., Branscombe, N. R., Brunot, S., Buunk, B. P., Chatard, A., Désert, M., et al. (2007). Culture, gender, and the self: Variations and impact of social comparison processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 1118–1134.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108, 814–834.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Henry, P. J., & Sears, D. O. (2002). The symbolic racism 2000 scale. Political Psychology, 23, 253–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Henry, P. J., Sidanius, J., Levin, S., & Pratto, F. (2005). Social dominance orientation, authoritarianism, and support for intergroup violence between the Middle East and America. Political Psychology, 26, 569–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Johnson, B. T., & Eagly, A. H. (2000). Quantitative synthesis of social psychological research. In H. T. Reis & C. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology (pp. 496–528). London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1–27.Google Scholar
  30. Jost, J. T., Banaji, M. R., & Nosek, B. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25, 881–919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jost, J. T., Blount, S., Pfeffer, J., & Hunyady, Gy. (2003a). Fair market ideology: Its cognitive-motivational underpinnings. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25, 53–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003b). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Jost, J. T., & Hunyady, O. (2005). Antecedents and consequences of system-justifying ideologies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 260–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jost, J. T., & Thompson, E. P. (2000). Group-based dominance and opposition to equality as independent predictors of self-esteem, ethnocentrism, and social policy attitudes among African Americans and European Americans. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 209–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Katz, I., & Hass, R. H. (1988). Racial ambivalence and American value conflict: Correlational and priming studies of dual cognitive structures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 893–905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kemmelmeier, M. (2005). The effects of race and social dominance orientation in simulated juror decision making. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35, 1030–1045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kluegel, J. R., & Smith, E. R. (1986). Beliefs about inequality: Americans’ view of what is and what ought to be. Hawthorne, NJ: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  38. Kugler, M. B. & Cooper, J. (2010). Ingroup promotion and system threat as predictors of the acceptance of inequality: Differential moderation across ideological factors. Unpublished manuscript, available from the author mkugler@princeton.edu.Google Scholar
  39. Lerner, M. (1980). The Belief in a Just World. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  40. Levin, S. L. (1996). A social psychological approach to understanding inter group attitudes in the United States and Israel. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Psychology, UCLA.Google Scholar
  41. Levin, S. L. (2004). Perceived group status differences and the effects of gender, ethnicity, and religion on social dominance orientation. Political Psychology, 25, 31–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Levin, S., & Sidanius, J. (1999). Social dominance and social identity in the United States and Israel: Ingroup favoritism or outgroup derogation? Political Psychology, 20, 99–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Li, Z., Wang, L., Shi, J., & Shi, W. (2006). Support for exclusionism as an independent dimension of social dominance orientation in mainland China. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 9, 203–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lipkus, I. (1991). The construction and preliminary validation of a global belief in a just world scale and the exploratory analysis of the multidimensional belief in a just world scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 1171–1178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lipkus, I. M., Dalbert, C., & Siegler, I. C. (1996). The importance of distinguishing the belief in a just world for self versus for others: Implications for psychological well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 666–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  47. Lowery, B. S., Knowles, E. D., & Unzueta, M. M. (2007). Framing inequity safely: Whites’ motivated perceptions of racial privilege. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 1237–1250.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Napier, J. L., & Jost, J. T. (2008). The “antidemocratic personality” revisited: A cross-national investigation of working-class authoritarianism. Journal of Social Issues, 64, 595–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Neuberg, S. L., Judice, T. N., & West, S. G. (1997). What the need for closure scale measures and what it does not: Toward differentiating among related epistemic motives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1396–1412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Neuberg, S. L., & Newsom, J. T. (1993). Personal need for structure: Individual differences in the desire for simple structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 113–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Nosek, B. A., Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (2007). The Implicit Association Test at age 7: A methodological and conceptual review. In J. A. Bargh (Ed.), Social psychology and the unconscious: The automaticity of higher mental processes (pp. 265–292). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  52. Nosek, B. A., & Hansen, J. J. (2008). The associations in our heads belong to us: Searching for attitudes and knowledge in implicit evaluation. Cognition and Emotion, 22, 553–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. O’Brien, L. T., & Major, B. N. (2005). System justifying beliefs and psychological well-being: The roles of group status and identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1718–1729.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Oppenheimer, D., Meyvis, T., & Davidenko, N. (2009). Instructional manipulation checks: Detecting satisficing to increase statistical power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 867–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Overbeck, J., Jost, J. T., Mosso, C., & Flizik, A. (2004). Resistant vs. acquiescent responses to group inferiority as a function of social dominance orientation in the USA and Italy. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 7, 35–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Paulhus, D. L. (1998). Manual for the balanced inventory of desirable responding (BIDR-7). Toronto, Ontario: Multi-Health Systems.Google Scholar
  57. Peña, Y., & Sidanius, J. (2002). U.S. patriotism and ideologies of group dominance: A tale of asymmetry. The Journal of Social Psychology, 142, 782–790.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Powell, A. A., Branscombe, N. R., & Schmitt, M. T. (2005). Inequality as ingroup privilege or outgroup disadvantage: The impact of group focus on collective guilt and interracial attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 508–521.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Pratto, F., & Glasford, D. E. (2008). Ethnocentrism and the value of a human life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1411–1428.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Pratto, F., Liu, J. H., Levin, S., Sidanius, J., Shih, M., Bachrach, H., et al. (2000). Social dominance orientation and the legitimization of inequality across cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 369–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., & Levin, S. (2006). Social dominance theory and the dynamics of intergroup relations: Taking stock and looking forward. European Review of Social Psychology, 17, 271–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741–763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Pratto, F., Stallworth, L. M., & Conway-Lanz, S. (1998). Social dominance orientation and the ideological legitimization of social policy. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1853–1875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Reyna, C., Henry, P. J., Korfmacher, W., & Tucker, A. (2006). Examining the principles in principled conservatism: The role of responsibility stereotypes as cues for deservingness in racial policy decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 109–128.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Roberts, B. W., Kuncel, N. R., Viechtbauer, W., & Bogg, T. (2007). Meta-analysis in personality psychology: A primer. In R. W. Robins, R. C. Fraley, & R. F. Krueger (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in personality psychology (pp. 652–672). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  66. Schwartz, S. H., Melech, G., Lehmann, A., Burgess, S., Harris, M., & Owens, V. (2001). Extending the cross-cultural validity of the theory of basic human values with a different method of measurement. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32, 519–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Sears, D. O., & Henry, P. J. (2005). Over thirty years later: A contemporary look at symbolic racism and its critics. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 95–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Sibley, C. G., & Duckitt, J. (2008). Personality and prejudice: A meta-analysis and theoretical review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12, 248–279.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Sibley, C. G., Liu, J. H., Duckitt, J., & Khan, S. S. (2008). Social representations of history and the legitimation of social inequality: The form and function of historical negation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 542–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Sibley, C. G., Wilson, M. S., & Duckitt, J. (2007a). Antecedents of men’s hostile and benevolent sexism: The dual roles of Social Dominance Orientation and Right-Wing Authoritarianism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 160–172.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Sibley, C. G., Wilson, M. S., & Duckitt, J. (2007b). Effects of dangerous and competitive worldviews on Right-Wing Authoritarianism and Social Dominance Orientation over a five-month period. Political Psychology, 28, 357–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Sibley, C. G., Wilson, M. S., & Robertson, A. (2007c). Differentiating the motivations and justifications underlying individual differences in Pakeha opposition to bicultural policy: Replication and extension of a predictive model. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 36, 25–33.Google Scholar
  73. Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An intergroup theory of social hierarchy and oppression. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  74. Sutton, R. M., & Douglas, K. M. (2005). Justice for all, or just for me? More support for self-other differences in just world beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 637–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  76. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations. Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole.Google Scholar
  77. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of inter-group behavior. In S. Worchel & L. W. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.Google Scholar
  78. Tam, K., Leung, A., & Chiu, C. (2008). On being a mindful authoritarian: Is need for cognition always associated with less punitiveness? Political Psychology, 29, 77–91.Google Scholar
  79. Tumin, M., Barton, P., & Burrus, B. (1958). Education, prejudice and discrimination: A study in readiness for desegregation. American Sociological Review, 23, 41–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Turner, J. C., Brown, R. J., & Tajfel, H. (1979). Social comparison and group interest in ingroup favouritism. European Journal of Social Psychology, 9, 187–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Wakslak, C., Jost, J. T., Tyler, T. R., & Chen, E. (2007). Moral outrage mediates the dampening effect of system justification on support for redistributive social policies. Psychological Science, 18, 267–274.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Waller, J. (1993). Correlation of need for cognition and modern racism. Psychological Reports, 73, 542.Google Scholar
  83. Webster, D. M., & Kruglanski, A. W. (1994). Individual differences in need for cognitive closure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 1049–1062.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. Whitley, B. E., Jr. (1999). Right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 126–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthew B. Kugler
    • 1
  • Joel Cooper
    • 2
  • Brian A. Nosek
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyLehigh UniversityBethlehemUSA
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyPrinceton UniversityPrincetonUSA
  3. 3.University of VirginiaCharlottesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations