Social Dominance Orientation and Intergroup Bias: The Legitimation of Favoritism for High-Status Groups

Based on both classical and contemporary perspectives on the psychology of legitimacy, it was hypothesized that the pattern of relationships between social dominance orientation (SDO) and favoritism for high-status groups would depend on the status of one’s group and the perceived legitimacy of the group-based status distinction. Among members of high-status groups, SDO was expected to be positively related to favoritism for the high-status group at both high and low levels of legitimacy. Among members of low-status groups, SDO and high-status group favoritism were only expected to be positively related when the system was perceived to be legitimate. The results of two studies provided a clear pattern of support for these expectations. Implications for social dominance theory and other perspectives on the psychology of legitimacy are discussed.

[1]  Friedrich Engels,et al.  FROM THE GERMAN IDEOLOGY , 2021, The New Economic Sociology.

[2]  D. Mackie,et al.  Intergroup relations. , 2019, Annual review of psychology.

[3]  H. Tajfel,et al.  The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior. , 2004 .

[4]  John T. Jost,et al.  The Psychology of Legitimacy: Emerging Perspectives on Ideology, Justice, and Intergroup Relations , 2001 .

[5]  J. Jost,et al.  Group-based dominance and opposition to equality as independent predictors of self-esteem, ethnocentrism, and social policy attitudes among african americans and european americans , 2000 .

[6]  Christopher M. Federico.  The Interactive Effects of Social Dominance Orientation, Group Status, and Perceived Stability on Favoritism for High-Status Groups , 1999 .

[7]  J. Rabinowitz,et al.  Go With the Flow or Fight the Power? The Interactive Effects of Social Dominance Orientation and Perceived Injustice on Support for the Status Quo , 1999 .

[8]  J. Sidanius,et al.  Social Dominance and Social Identity in the United States and Israel: Ingroup Favoritism or Outgroup Derogation? , 1999 .

[9]  Jim Sidanius,et al.  Ethnic Identity, Legitimizing Ideologies, and Social Status: A Matter of Ideological Asymmetry , 1998 .

[10]  N. Ellemers,et al.  Bias in Intergroup Perceptions: Balancing Group Identity with Social Reality , 1997 .

[11]  J. Jost.  Negative illusions: conceptual clarification and psychological evidence concerning false consciousness , 1995 .

[12]  F. Pratto,et al.  Social Dominance Orientation and the Political Psychology of Gender: A Case of Invariance? , 1994 .

[13]  B. Malle,et al.  Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. , 1994 .

[14]  F. Pratto,et al.  Gender, Ethnic Status, and Ideological Asymmetry , 1994 .

[15]  F. Pratto,et al.  In-Group Identification, Social Dominance Orientation, and Differential Intergroup Social Allocation , 1994 .

[16]  E. Hagopian.  Arabs and Jews in Israel: Change and Continuity in Mutual Intolerance, by Sammy Smooha. (Westview Special Studies on the Middle East, Vol. II) 357 pages, tables, appendices, references, index. Boulder: Westview Press, 1992. $38.50 (Paper) ISBN 0-8133-0756-2 , 1993, Middle East Studies Association Bulletin.

[17]  N. Ellemers,et al.  Effects of the legitimacy of low group or individual status on individual and collective status-enhancement strategies. , 1993 .

[18]  Brian Mullen,et al.  Ingroup bias as a function of salience, relevance, and status: An integration , 1992 .

[19]  F. Pratto,et al.  Consensual racism and career track: Some implications of social dominance theory. , 1991 .

[20]  Samuel R. Gross,et al.  Death and Discrimination: Racial Disparities in Capital Sentencing , 1989 .

[21]  M. Hogg,et al.  Comments on the motivational status of self-esteem in social identity and intergroup discrimination , 1988 .

[22]  Itesh Sachdev,et al.  Status differenttals and intergroup behaviour , 1987 .

[23]  Donald M. Taylor,et al.  Disadvantaged group responses to perceived inequality: from passive acceptance to collective action , 1987 .

[24]  E. Cairns,et al.  Conservatism and its relationship to general and specific ethnocentrism in Northern Ireland , 1981 .

[25]  J. Elashoff,et al.  Multiple Regression in Behavioral Research. , 1974 .

[26]  C. Mills,et al.  The Theory of Social and Economic Organization , 1948 .

[27]  F. Pratto,et al.  Legitimizing ideologies: The social dominance approach. , 2001 .

[28]  James H. Liu,et al.  Social dominance orientation, anti-egalitarianism and the political psychology of gender: An extension and cross-cultural replication. , 2000 .

[29]  S. Levin,et al.  Peering into the jaws of the beast: The integrative dynamics of social identity, symbolic racism, and social dominance. , 1999 .

[30]  F. Pratto,et al.  INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS AND GROUP PROCESSES Racism, Conservatism, Affirmative Action, and Intellectual Sophistication: A Matter of Principled Conservatism or Group Dominance? , 1996 .

[31]  J. B. Mcconahay,et al.  The scar of race. , 1996 .

[32]  Jim Sidanius,et al.  The psychology of group conflict and the dynamics of oppression: A social dominance perspective. , 1993 .

[33]  Felicia Pratto,et al.  The inevitability of oppression and the dynamics of social dominance. , 1993 .

[34]  N. Ellemers.  The Influence of Socio-structural Variables on Identity Management Strategies , 1993 .

[35]  Larry E. Toothaker,et al.  Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions , 1991 .

[36]  R. Bourhis,et al.  Power and status differentials in minority and majority group relations , 1991 .

[37]  Roderick M. Kramer,et al.  The Psychology of Intergroup Attitudes and Behavior , 1985 .

[38]  R. Paternoster.  Prosecutorial discretion in requesting the death penalty: A case of victim-based racial discrimination. , 1984 .

[39]  D. Smith,et al.  The Ruling Class , 1980 .

[40]  M. Brewer.  In-group bias in the minimal intergroup situation: A cognitive-motivational analysis. , 1979 .

[41]  J. Turner,et al.  Social status, cognitive alternatives, and intergroup relations: (668292012-213) , 1976 .