The Role of Legitimizing Ideologies as Predictors of Ambivalent Sexism in Young People: Evidence from Italy and the USA
- 697 Downloads
The studies presented here focus on the relationship between legitimizing ideologies and ambivalent sexism. 544 Italian students (Study 1) and 297 US students (Study 2) completed several scales: social dominance orientation (SDO), system justification (SJ), political orientation, religiosity, and the Glick and Fiske (J Pers Soc Psychol 70(3):491–512, 1996) Ambivalent Sexism Inventory. Zero-order correlations revealed all facets of ideological attitudes to be positively related to each other and correlated with ambivalent sexism. In particular, the SDO was related to both ideology components of SJ and political orientation and to ambivalent sexism (hostile and benevolent). Moderated regressions revealed that SDO has a positive impact on hostile sexism for men only, while SJ has a positive impact on hostile sexism for women only. While the first result was stable across the two studies, the last moderated effect has been detected only in Study 1. We discuss the results with respect to different facets of social ideologies and cultural differences between the two countries.
KeywordsSystem justification Social dominance orientation Ambivalent sexism Conservative ideology
We gratefully acknowledge the support of John T. Jost. We warmly thank the MA students from the Universities of Torino and Cagliari—Italy for their help in collecting the data. We also would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.
- Aiello, A., Chirumbolo, A., Leone L., & Pratto, F. (2005). Uno studio di Adattamento e Validazione della Scala di Orientamento alla Dominanza Sociale [A study for an Italian Adaptation and Validation of the Social Dominance Scale]. Rassegna di Psicologia, 2(2), 65–75.Google Scholar
- Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). Ambivalent sexism. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 33, pp. 115–188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Jackman, M. R. (1994). The velvet glove: Paternalism and conflict in gender, class, and race relations. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
- Jost, J. T. (2011). System justification theory as compliment, complement, and corrective to theories of social identification and social dominance. In D. Dunning (Ed.), Social motivation (pp. 223–263). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
- Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. (2003a). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 75, 129–339.Google Scholar
- Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
- Manganelli, A. M., Volpato, C., & Canova, L. (2008). L’atteggiamento ambivalente verso uomini e donne. Un contributo alla validazione delle scale ASI e AMI [The ambivalent attitude toward men and women. A Validation Study of ASI and AMI scale]. Giornale Italiano di Psicologia, 35, 261–287.Google Scholar
- Moscovici, S. (1986). L’ère des représentations sociales. In W. Doise & A. Palmonari (Eds.), L’étude des représentations sociaels. Neuchâtel: Delachaux et Niestlé.Google Scholar
- Ng, S. H. (1980). The social psychology of power. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Pratto, F., & Walker, A. (2004). The bases of gendered power. In A. H. Eagly, A. Beall, & R. Sternberg (Eds.), The psychology of gender (2nd ed., pp. 242–268). New York: Guilford Publications.Google Scholar
- Sidanius, J. (1993). The psychology of group conflict and the dynamics of oppression: A social dominance perspective. In S. Iyengar & W. J. McGuire (Eds.), Explorations in political psychology (pp. 183–219). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar