Abstract The additive and interactive effects of Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) and Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) were examined using 16 independent samples of New Zealand European participants (N = 2,164). Consistent with Duckitt's (2001) Dual Process Model, SDO and RWA displayed strong additive effects across various domains of intergroup-related attitude, including measures of racism, sexism, homosexual prejudice, and ethnic and religious ingroup identification. In each of these five domains, meta-analysis indicated that the statistical interaction of SDO and RWA accounted for an average of less than .001% variance in addition to their linear combination. It is concluded that the association between SDO and various discriminatory attitudes and beliefs is only extremely weakly dependent on RWA, and vice-versa, suggesting that these two ideological attitudes are primarily additive, rather than interactive, in nature. Show Journal Information Political Psychology is an interdisciplinary journal dedicated to the analysis of the interrelationships between psychological and political processes. The field draws on diverse disciplinary sources including cultural and psychological anthropology, cognitive psychology, clinical psychology, economics, history, international relations, philosophy, political science, political theory, psychology of personality, social psychology, and sociology. Publisher Information International Society of Political Psychology (ISPP) is an interdisciplinary organization representing all fields of inquiry concerned with exploring the relationships between political and psychological processes. Members include psychologists, political scientists, psychiatrists, historians, sociologists, economists, anthropologists, as well as journalists, government officials and others. The Society is also international, with members from all regions of the world: the Americas, Europe, Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. Abstract It is commonly accepted that social dominance orientation (SDO) and right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) are potent unique predictors of a variety of prejudice and prejudice-related constructs. However, contrary to some predictions, there has been little evidence that these constructs interact to produce this outcome—they appear to be additive but not interactive in their prediction of prejudice. We extend the interaction hypothesis to consideration of another broadly relevant construct—political ideology. Drawing from 14 independent New Zealand—based samples, we show, through meta-analysis and multilevel random coefficient modelling, that SDO and RWA additively and interactively predict levels of political conservatism operationalised in a variety of ways. Specifically, both constructs are associated with increasing political conservatism, and the lowest levels of conservatism (or highest levels of political liberalism) are found in those lowest in both SDO and RWA. Journal Information Political Psychology is an interdisciplinary journal dedicated to the analysis of the interrelationships between psychological and political processes. The field draws on diverse disciplinary sources including cultural and psychological anthropology, cognitive psychology, clinical psychology, economics, history, international relations, philosophy, political science, political theory, psychology of personality, social psychology, and sociology. Publisher Information International Society of Political Psychology (ISPP) is an interdisciplinary organization representing all fields of inquiry concerned with exploring the relationships between political and psychological processes. Members include psychologists, political scientists, psychiatrists, historians, sociologists, economists, anthropologists, as well as journalists, government officials and others. The Society is also international, with members from all regions of the world: the Americas, Europe, Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. ISSN Online : 1841-0413  Support ContactPsychOpen Support Team Principal ContactVlad Glăveanu (EJOP) Associate Professor and Head of the Department of Psychology and Counselling Webster University Geneva, Switzerland Recommended textbook solutions
Consumer Behavior: Buying, Having, Being13th EditionMichael R Solomon 449 solutions Social Psychology10th EditionElliot Aronson, Robin M. Akert, Samuel R. Sommers, Timothy D. Wilson 525 solutions HDEV56th EditionSpencer A. Rathus 380 solutions Myers' Psychology for the AP Course3rd EditionC. Nathan DeWall, David G Myers 955 solutions What is the difference between social dominance orientation SDO and RightWhat is the difference between Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) and Right-Wing Authoritarianism? SDO concentrates on economic conflicts while Right-wing Authoritarianism concentrates on value conflicts.
What is the difference between social dominance orientation and rightRight-Wing Authoritarianism focuses on submission to ingroup authority and relations within groups, while Social Dominance Orientation focuses on dominance over outgroups and relations between groups.
What is social dominance orientation in psychology definition?Definition. Social dominance orientation (SDO) is a measure of an individual's support for group-based hierarchies. It reflects a person's attitudes toward hierarchies in general, as well as beliefs about whether one's own group should dominate other groups.
What does social dominance orientation measure?Social dominance orientation is a measurement of “the general desire to establish and maintain hierarchically structured intergroup relations regardless of the position of one's own group(s) within this hierarchy” (Sidanius et al. 2016, p. 152).
|
What is the difference between social dominance orientation (sdo) and right-wing authoritarianism?
zusammenhängende Posts
Urheberrechte © © 2024 toptenid.com Inc.
