The Experts below are selected from a list of 56466 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Felicia Pratto - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Social Dominance in Context and in Individuals: Contextual Moderation of Robust Effects of Social Dominance Orientation in 15 Languages and 20 Countries
Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2013Co-Authors: Felicia Pratto, Andrew L. Stewart, Atilla Cidam, Fouad Bou Zeineddine, María Aranda, Antonio Aiello, Xenia Chryssochoou, Aleksandra Cichocka, J. Christopher Cohrs, Kevin DurrheimAbstract:We tested the internal reliability and predictive validity of a new 4-item Short Social Dominance Orientation (SSDO) scale among adults in 20 countries, using 15 languages (N = 2,130). Low scores indicate preferring group inclusion and equality to Dominance. As expected, cross-nationally, the lower people were on SSDO, the more they endorsed more women in leadership positions, protecting minorities, and aid to the poor. Multilevel moderation models showed that each effect was stronger in nations where a relevant kind of group power differentiation was more salient. Distributions of SSDO were positively skewed, despite use of an extended response scale; results show rejecting group hierarchy is normative. The short scale is effective. Challenges regarding translations, use of short scales, and intersections between individual and collective levels in Social Dominance theory are discussed.
-
Social Dominance theory and the dynamics of intergroup relations taking stock and looking forward
European Review of Social Psychology, 2006Co-Authors: Felicia Pratto, Jim Sidanius, Shana LevinAbstract:This chapter reviews the last 15 years of research inspired by Social Dominance theory, a general theory of societal group-based inequality. In doing so, we sketch the broad outlines of the theory and discuss some of the controversies surrounding it, such as the “invariance hypothesis” regarding gender differences in Social Dominance orientation (SDO) and the effect of Social context on the expression of SDO. We also discuss the central role of gender in the construction and maintenance of group-based inequality, and review some of the new research inspired by the Social Dominance perspective. Finally, we identify and discuss some of the most important theoretical questions posed by Social Dominance theory that are yet to be researched.
-
Social Dominance Orientation, Gender, and Increasing Educational Exposure1
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2006Co-Authors: Jim Sidanius, Stacey Sinclair, Felicia PrattoAbstract:Using a large panel sample of undergraduates, we measured the Social Dominance orientation (SDO) scores of men and women once a year across a 4½-year period. Employing repeated-measures ANOVAs, we found that, even after controlling for the character of students' academic majors (hierarchy enhancing or hierarchy attenuating), males showed significantly higher SDO scores than did females across the entire college career. The data are discussed in terms of the invariance hypothesis within Social Dominance theory.
-
Social Dominance Orientation, Authoritarianism, and Support for Intergroup Violence Between the Middle
2005Co-Authors: P. J. Henry, Jim Sidanius, Shana Levin, Felicia PrattoAbstract:Social Dominance theory has generally posited that terror and intergroup violence can be explained in terms of Social Dominance struggles. Social Dominance theorists have described terror mostly as a tool for maintaining intergroup hierarchies in society (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Although implications of the theory suggest that terror may also be used by lower status groups as a tool for the resistance of domination by higher status groups, this prediction heretofore has not been empirically demonstrated. Data from two samples, one in the United States and one in Lebanon, were collected regarding attitudes toward terrorism and intergroup violence. The results show that the American sample demonstrates the typical patterns of Social Dominance such that those who are higher in Social Dominance orientation tend to support greater violence toward the Middle East. However, the Lebanese sample shows the opposite pattern, such that those who are lower in Social Dominance orientation tend to support violence toward the West. These results suggest that (1) support for terrorism among Middle East citizens is a project of counterDominance, and, more broadly, that (2) the relationship between Social Dominance orientation and support for violence depends on the dynamics of the conflict and the status of the perpetrators.
-
Social Dominance Orientation, Authoritarianism, and Support for Intergroup Violence Between the Middle East and America
Political Psychology, 2005Co-Authors: P. J. Henry, Jim Sidanius, Shana Levin, Felicia PrattoAbstract:Social Dominance theory has generally posited that terror and intergroup violence can be explained in terms of Social Dominance struggles. Social Dominance theorists have described terror mostly as a tool for maintaining intergroup hierarchies in society (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Although implications of the theory suggest that terror may also be used by lower status groups as a tool for the resistance of domination by higher status groups, this prediction heretofore has not been empirically demonstrated. Data from two samples, one in the United States and one in Lebanon, were collected regarding attitudes toward terrorism and intergroup violence. The results show that the American sample demonstrates the typical patterns of Social Dominance such that those who are higher in Social Dominance orientation tend to support greater violence toward the Middle East. However, the Lebanese sample shows the opposite pattern, such that those who are lower in Social Dominance orientation tend to support violence toward the West. These results suggest that (1) support for terrorism among Middle East citizens is a project of counterDominance, and, more broadly, that (2) the relationship between Social Dominance orientation and support for violence depends on the dynamics of the conflict and the status of the perpetrators.
Jim Sidanius - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Social Dominance theory and the dynamics of intergroup relations taking stock and looking forward
European Review of Social Psychology, 2006Co-Authors: Felicia Pratto, Jim Sidanius, Shana LevinAbstract:This chapter reviews the last 15 years of research inspired by Social Dominance theory, a general theory of societal group-based inequality. In doing so, we sketch the broad outlines of the theory and discuss some of the controversies surrounding it, such as the “invariance hypothesis” regarding gender differences in Social Dominance orientation (SDO) and the effect of Social context on the expression of SDO. We also discuss the central role of gender in the construction and maintenance of group-based inequality, and review some of the new research inspired by the Social Dominance perspective. Finally, we identify and discuss some of the most important theoretical questions posed by Social Dominance theory that are yet to be researched.
-
Social Dominance Orientation, Gender, and Increasing Educational Exposure1
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2006Co-Authors: Jim Sidanius, Stacey Sinclair, Felicia PrattoAbstract:Using a large panel sample of undergraduates, we measured the Social Dominance orientation (SDO) scores of men and women once a year across a 4½-year period. Employing repeated-measures ANOVAs, we found that, even after controlling for the character of students' academic majors (hierarchy enhancing or hierarchy attenuating), males showed significantly higher SDO scores than did females across the entire college career. The data are discussed in terms of the invariance hypothesis within Social Dominance theory.
-
Social Dominance Orientation, Authoritarianism, and Support for Intergroup Violence Between the Middle
2005Co-Authors: P. J. Henry, Jim Sidanius, Shana Levin, Felicia PrattoAbstract:Social Dominance theory has generally posited that terror and intergroup violence can be explained in terms of Social Dominance struggles. Social Dominance theorists have described terror mostly as a tool for maintaining intergroup hierarchies in society (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Although implications of the theory suggest that terror may also be used by lower status groups as a tool for the resistance of domination by higher status groups, this prediction heretofore has not been empirically demonstrated. Data from two samples, one in the United States and one in Lebanon, were collected regarding attitudes toward terrorism and intergroup violence. The results show that the American sample demonstrates the typical patterns of Social Dominance such that those who are higher in Social Dominance orientation tend to support greater violence toward the Middle East. However, the Lebanese sample shows the opposite pattern, such that those who are lower in Social Dominance orientation tend to support violence toward the West. These results suggest that (1) support for terrorism among Middle East citizens is a project of counterDominance, and, more broadly, that (2) the relationship between Social Dominance orientation and support for violence depends on the dynamics of the conflict and the status of the perpetrators.
-
Social Dominance Orientation, Authoritarianism, and Support for Intergroup Violence Between the Middle East and America
Political Psychology, 2005Co-Authors: P. J. Henry, Jim Sidanius, Shana Levin, Felicia PrattoAbstract:Social Dominance theory has generally posited that terror and intergroup violence can be explained in terms of Social Dominance struggles. Social Dominance theorists have described terror mostly as a tool for maintaining intergroup hierarchies in society (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Although implications of the theory suggest that terror may also be used by lower status groups as a tool for the resistance of domination by higher status groups, this prediction heretofore has not been empirically demonstrated. Data from two samples, one in the United States and one in Lebanon, were collected regarding attitudes toward terrorism and intergroup violence. The results show that the American sample demonstrates the typical patterns of Social Dominance such that those who are higher in Social Dominance orientation tend to support greater violence toward the Middle East. However, the Lebanese sample shows the opposite pattern, such that those who are lower in Social Dominance orientation tend to support violence toward the West. These results suggest that (1) support for terrorism among Middle East citizens is a project of counterDominance, and, more broadly, that (2) the relationship between Social Dominance orientation and support for violence depends on the dynamics of the conflict and the status of the perpetrators.
-
Social Dominance Theory: Its Agenda and Method
Political Psychology, 2004Co-Authors: Jim Sidanius, Felicia Pratto, Colette Van Laar, Shana LevinAbstract:The theory has been misconstrued in four primary ways, which are often expressed as the claims of psychological reductionism, conceptual redundancy, biological reductionism, and hierarchy justification. This paper addresses these claims and suggests how Social Dominance theory builds on and moves beyond Social identity theory and system justification theory.
Shana Levin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Social Dominance theory and the dynamics of intergroup relations taking stock and looking forward
European Review of Social Psychology, 2006Co-Authors: Felicia Pratto, Jim Sidanius, Shana LevinAbstract:This chapter reviews the last 15 years of research inspired by Social Dominance theory, a general theory of societal group-based inequality. In doing so, we sketch the broad outlines of the theory and discuss some of the controversies surrounding it, such as the “invariance hypothesis” regarding gender differences in Social Dominance orientation (SDO) and the effect of Social context on the expression of SDO. We also discuss the central role of gender in the construction and maintenance of group-based inequality, and review some of the new research inspired by the Social Dominance perspective. Finally, we identify and discuss some of the most important theoretical questions posed by Social Dominance theory that are yet to be researched.
-
Social Dominance Orientation, Authoritarianism, and Support for Intergroup Violence Between the Middle
2005Co-Authors: P. J. Henry, Jim Sidanius, Shana Levin, Felicia PrattoAbstract:Social Dominance theory has generally posited that terror and intergroup violence can be explained in terms of Social Dominance struggles. Social Dominance theorists have described terror mostly as a tool for maintaining intergroup hierarchies in society (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Although implications of the theory suggest that terror may also be used by lower status groups as a tool for the resistance of domination by higher status groups, this prediction heretofore has not been empirically demonstrated. Data from two samples, one in the United States and one in Lebanon, were collected regarding attitudes toward terrorism and intergroup violence. The results show that the American sample demonstrates the typical patterns of Social Dominance such that those who are higher in Social Dominance orientation tend to support greater violence toward the Middle East. However, the Lebanese sample shows the opposite pattern, such that those who are lower in Social Dominance orientation tend to support violence toward the West. These results suggest that (1) support for terrorism among Middle East citizens is a project of counterDominance, and, more broadly, that (2) the relationship between Social Dominance orientation and support for violence depends on the dynamics of the conflict and the status of the perpetrators.
-
Social Dominance Orientation, Authoritarianism, and Support for Intergroup Violence Between the Middle East and America
Political Psychology, 2005Co-Authors: P. J. Henry, Jim Sidanius, Shana Levin, Felicia PrattoAbstract:Social Dominance theory has generally posited that terror and intergroup violence can be explained in terms of Social Dominance struggles. Social Dominance theorists have described terror mostly as a tool for maintaining intergroup hierarchies in society (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Although implications of the theory suggest that terror may also be used by lower status groups as a tool for the resistance of domination by higher status groups, this prediction heretofore has not been empirically demonstrated. Data from two samples, one in the United States and one in Lebanon, were collected regarding attitudes toward terrorism and intergroup violence. The results show that the American sample demonstrates the typical patterns of Social Dominance such that those who are higher in Social Dominance orientation tend to support greater violence toward the Middle East. However, the Lebanese sample shows the opposite pattern, such that those who are lower in Social Dominance orientation tend to support violence toward the West. These results suggest that (1) support for terrorism among Middle East citizens is a project of counterDominance, and, more broadly, that (2) the relationship between Social Dominance orientation and support for violence depends on the dynamics of the conflict and the status of the perpetrators.
-
Social Dominance Theory: Its Agenda and Method
Political Psychology, 2004Co-Authors: Jim Sidanius, Felicia Pratto, Colette Van Laar, Shana LevinAbstract:The theory has been misconstrued in four primary ways, which are often expressed as the claims of psychological reductionism, conceptual redundancy, biological reductionism, and hierarchy justification. This paper addresses these claims and suggests how Social Dominance theory builds on and moves beyond Social identity theory and system justification theory.
-
Social Dominance Orientation and the Legitimization of Inequality Across Cultures
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 2000Co-Authors: Felicia Pratto, Jim Sidanius, James H Liu, Shana Levin, Margaret Shih, Hagit Bachrach, Peter HegartyAbstract:The authors tested three hypotheses from Social Dominance theory in four cultures: (a) that individual differences in Social Dominance orientation (SDO), or the preference for group-based inequality, can be reliably measured in societies that are group-based hegemonies; (b) that SDO correlates positively with attitudes supporting hegemonic groups and correlates negatively with attitudes supporting oppressed groups; and (c) that men are higher on SDO than women. For the most part, the results confirmed the hypotheses. SDO scales were internally reliable and were administered in English, Chinese, and Hebrew. SDO scores correlated with sexism, measured in culturally appropriate ways, in every culture, and with ethnic prejudice and other attitudes concerning the local hegemony except in China. Men were higher on SDO than women in most samples. Findings are discussed in terms of ideological and psychological facilitators of group Dominance.
Anthony D. Pellegrini - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Behavioral and Social cognitive processes in preschool children's Social Dominance.
Aggressive behavior, 2011Co-Authors: Anthony D. Pellegrini, Cary J. Roseth, Mark J. Van Ryzin, Catherine M. Bohn-gettler, Danielle N. Dupuis, Meghan Hickey, Annie PeshkamAbstract:This longitudinal, naturalistic study addressed behavioral and Social cognitive processes implicated in preschool children's Social Dominance. In the first objective, we examined the degree to which peer aggression, affiliation, and postaggression reconciliation predicted Social Dominance across a school year. Consistent with predictions, all three predicted Dominance early in the year while only affiliation predicted Dominance later in the year, suggesting that aggression, affiliation, and reconciliation were used to establish Social Dominance where affiliation was used to maintain it. In the second, exploratory, objective we tested the relative importance of Social Dominance and reconciliation (the Machiavellian and Vygotskian intelligence hypotheses, respectively) in predicting theory of mind/false belief. Results indicated that Social Dominance accounted for significant variance, beyond that related to reconciliation and affiliation, in predicting theory of mind/false belief status. Results are discussed in terms of specific behavioral and Social cognitive processes employed in establishing and maintaining Social Dominance. Aggr. Behav. Aggr. Behav. 37:248–257, 2011. © 2011 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
-
Social Dominance in preschool classrooms
Journal of Comparative Psychology, 2007Co-Authors: Anthony D. Pellegrini, Cary J. Roseth, Shanna B. Mliner, Catherine M. Bohn, Mark J. Van Ryzin, Natalie Vance, Carol L. Cheatham, Amanda R. TarulloAbstract:The authors examined preschoolers' aggressive and cooperative behaviors and their associations with Social Dominance. First and as predicted, directly observed aggressive interactions decreased across the school year, and same-sex aggression occurred more frequently than cross-sex aggression. Next, the authors examined the relation between aggression and reconciliation, cooperation, and Social display variables. Teacher ratings of children's aggression related to observed aggression but not to observed "wins" of aggressive bouts. Instead, wins were related to cooperation and display variables. Finally, they examined the relative power of wins and cooperation in predicting 2 measures of Social Dominance. After age was controlled, wins alone predicted teacher-rated Social Dominance. Results are discussed in terms of different forms of competition and how school ethos affects these forms.
-
Social Dominance in preschool classrooms.
Journal of comparative psychology (Washington D.C. : 1983), 2007Co-Authors: Anthony D. Pellegrini, Cary J. Roseth, Shanna B. Mliner, Catherine M. Bohn, Mark J. Van Ryzin, Natalie Vance, Carol L. Cheatham, Amanda R. TarulloAbstract:The authors examined preschoolers' aggressive and cooperative behaviors and their associations with Social Dominance. First and as predicted, directly observed aggressive interactions decreased across the school year, and same-sex aggression occurred more frequently than cross-sex aggression. Next, the authors examined the relation between aggression and reconciliation, cooperation, and Social display variables. Teacher ratings of children's aggression related to observed aggression but not to observed "wins" of aggressive bouts. Instead, wins were related to cooperation and display variables. Finally, they examined the relative power of wins and cooperation in predicting 2 measures of Social Dominance. After age was controlled, wins alone predicted teacher-rated Social Dominance. Results are discussed in terms of different forms of competition and how school ethos affects these forms. Language: en
-
Preschoolers' aggression, affiliation, and Social Dominance relationships: An observational, longitudinal study
Journal of School Psychology, 2007Co-Authors: Cary J. Roseth, Anthony D. Pellegrini, Catherine M. Bohn, Mark J. Van Ryzin, Natalie VanceAbstract:Abstract This study of 61 preschool children used an observational, longitudinal design to examine the degree to which Social Dominance relationships account for time-related change in rates of aggression and affiliation across a school year. Specific hypotheses reflected the view that, over time, behavioral function should change in accord with the stability of Social Dominance relationships, Social norms, and on-going developmental processes. Results showed that change in rates of aggression was non-linear (i.e., increasing then decreasing over the year), that physical and verbal forms of aggression were associated with distinct longitudinal trajectories, and that these trajectories were related to rates of affiliation and visual regard. As predicted, Social Dominance accounted for significant variation in these patterns. Implications for theory, future research, and school practitioners are discussed.
Whitley - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Right-wing authoritarianism, Social Dominance orientation, and prejudice
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1999Co-Authors: E Bernard, WhitleyAbstract:Right-wing authoritarianism and Social Dominance orientation have been proposed as 2 major individual-difference variables underlying prejudice. This study examined the relationships of these variables to 3 forms of prejudice-affective responses, stereotyping, and attitudes toward equality enhancement-directed at 2 Social groups-African Americans and homosexuals. Canonical correlation analyses showed that Social Dominance orientation was related to most forms of prejudice directed toward both groups and that right-wing authoritarianism was related to affective responses to and stereotyping of homosexuals. In addition, it was found that, as predicted by the Social Dominance model, stereotyping mediated the relationships between Social Dominance orientation and other forms of prejudice and that Social Dominance orientation mediated gender differences in expressions of prejudice.
