Psychology research abstracts
SDO & gender
SDO + RWA
SDO vs RWA
RWA, SDO,
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Friday, March 6, 2009
SDO
SDO: Social dominance orientation is a personality variable that is measured on the SDO Scale, which measures an individual's attitudes toward social hierarchy. SDO is conceptualised as a measure of individual differences in levels of group-based discrimination and domination. High Social Dominance Orientation is strongly correlated with conservative political views, and opposition to programs and policies that aim to promote equality.
Altemeyer's research suggests that high SDO scorers are personally competitive and are also somewhat Machiavellian (manipulative and amoral). High-SDO individuals tend to gravitate toward hierarchy-enhancing jobs and institutions, such as law enforcement, that are themselves hierarchically structured vis-a-vis individuals within them.
Males tend to have higher SDO scores than females, and are also observed to be more socially hierarchical.
Refs:
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(4), 741-763.
Sibley et al.: "Social Dominance Orientation and Right-Wing Authoritarianism: Additive and Interactive Effects" in Political Psychology, Vol. 27, No. 5, 2006.
Sidanius, Jim and Pratto, Felicia (2001). Social Dominance: An Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Altemeyer's research suggests that high SDO scorers are personally competitive and are also somewhat Machiavellian (manipulative and amoral). High-SDO individuals tend to gravitate toward hierarchy-enhancing jobs and institutions, such as law enforcement, that are themselves hierarchically structured vis-a-vis individuals within them.
Males tend to have higher SDO scores than females, and are also observed to be more socially hierarchical.
Refs:
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(4), 741-763.
Sibley et al.: "Social Dominance Orientation and Right-Wing Authoritarianism: Additive and Interactive Effects" in Political Psychology, Vol. 27, No. 5, 2006.
Sidanius, Jim and Pratto, Felicia (2001). Social Dominance: An Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
SDO & gender
Social dominance orientation and gender: the moderating role of gender identity.
Br J Soc Psychol. 2003 Jun;42(Pt 2):187-98.
Wilson MS, Liu JH.
The aim of this research was to investigate the claim that gender differences in levels of social dominance orientation (SDO; Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, & Malle, 1994), a personality variable measuring a general predisposition towards anti-egalitarianism, are essentially invariant (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Previous findings have indicated that (regardless of covariate) males display higher levels of SDO than females. Two studies were conducted to test the expectation (derived from social identity theory) that the gender-SDO relationship would be moderated by strength of gender group identification. Both samples (150 non-students and 163 students) completed the full SDO(6) measure, and measures of gender group identification. Consistent with predictions, strength of gender identification was found to moderate the gender-SDO relationship, such that increasing group identification was associated with increasing SDO scores for males, and decreasing SDO for females. This result raises questions concerning the theoretical basis of social dominance theory, and whether gender group membership should be accorded a different status from other 'arbitrary-set' group memberships.
School of Psychology, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand. Marc.Wilson@vuw.ac.nz
Comment in:
Br J Soc Psychol. 2003 Jun;42(Pt 2):199-206; discussion 215-23.
Br J Soc Psychol. 2003 Jun;42(Pt 2):207-13; discussion 215-23.
Why are men more likely to support group-based dominance than women? The mediating role of gender identification.
Br J Soc Psychol. 2004 Jun;43(Pt 2):287-97.
Dambrun M, Duarte S, Guimond S.
Arguing from a sociobiological perspective, Sidanius and Pratto (1999) have shown that the male/female difference in social dominance orientation (SDO) is largely invariant across cultural, situational and contextual boundaries. The main objective of this study was to test the validity of Social Dominance Theory (SDT) by contrasting it with a model derived from Social Identity Theory (SIT). More specifically, while SIT predicts that gender identification mediates the effect of gender on SDO, SDT predicts the reverse. According to SDT, the degree to which men and women endorse status legitimizing ideology should determine to what extent they identify with their gender group. Using structural equation modelling, the results provide strong support for the SIT model and no support for SDT predictions. Implications of these results for social dominance theory and its sociobiologically based invariance hypothesis are discussed.
Université Blaise Pascal, France dambrun@srvpsy.univ-bpclermont.fr
.
Br J Soc Psychol. 2003 Jun;42(Pt 2):187-98.
Wilson MS, Liu JH.
The aim of this research was to investigate the claim that gender differences in levels of social dominance orientation (SDO; Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, & Malle, 1994), a personality variable measuring a general predisposition towards anti-egalitarianism, are essentially invariant (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Previous findings have indicated that (regardless of covariate) males display higher levels of SDO than females. Two studies were conducted to test the expectation (derived from social identity theory) that the gender-SDO relationship would be moderated by strength of gender group identification. Both samples (150 non-students and 163 students) completed the full SDO(6) measure, and measures of gender group identification. Consistent with predictions, strength of gender identification was found to moderate the gender-SDO relationship, such that increasing group identification was associated with increasing SDO scores for males, and decreasing SDO for females. This result raises questions concerning the theoretical basis of social dominance theory, and whether gender group membership should be accorded a different status from other 'arbitrary-set' group memberships.
School of Psychology, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand. Marc.Wilson@vuw.ac.nz
Comment in:
Br J Soc Psychol. 2003 Jun;42(Pt 2):199-206; discussion 215-23.
Br J Soc Psychol. 2003 Jun;42(Pt 2):207-13; discussion 215-23.
Why are men more likely to support group-based dominance than women? The mediating role of gender identification.
Br J Soc Psychol. 2004 Jun;43(Pt 2):287-97.
Dambrun M, Duarte S, Guimond S.
Arguing from a sociobiological perspective, Sidanius and Pratto (1999) have shown that the male/female difference in social dominance orientation (SDO) is largely invariant across cultural, situational and contextual boundaries. The main objective of this study was to test the validity of Social Dominance Theory (SDT) by contrasting it with a model derived from Social Identity Theory (SIT). More specifically, while SIT predicts that gender identification mediates the effect of gender on SDO, SDT predicts the reverse. According to SDT, the degree to which men and women endorse status legitimizing ideology should determine to what extent they identify with their gender group. Using structural equation modelling, the results provide strong support for the SIT model and no support for SDT predictions. Implications of these results for social dominance theory and its sociobiologically based invariance hypothesis are discussed.
Université Blaise Pascal, France dambrun@srvpsy.univ-bpclermont.fr
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
