Author
Glenn D. Wilson
Other affiliations: University of Cambridge, University of East London, University of New England (Australia) ...read more
Bio: Glenn D. Wilson is an academic researcher from University of London. The author has contributed to research in topics: Personality & Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. The author has an hindex of 45, co-authored 152 publications receiving 6617 citations. Previous affiliations of Glenn D. Wilson include University of Cambridge & University of East London.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
TL;DR: The ‘Conservatism Scale’ is found to be a remarkably reliable, valid, and economical instrument.
Abstract: A variable of personality which has been shown to have considerable predictive value in both social and clinical psychology is that which is variously labelled authoritarianism, dogmatism, fascism, and anti-scientific attitude. The term ‘conservatism’ is preferred because it is less value-toned than other alternatives. Previous tests of this dimension are criticized on a number of grounds and the development of a new test which circumvents these deficiencies is described. The ‘Conservatism Scale’ is found to be a remarkably reliable, valid, and economical instrument.
537 citations
Book•
14 Oct 2013
TL;DR: A review and empirical study of the concept of Conservatism can be found in this article, with a focus on the C-scale of children's attitudes and the factor structure of the scale.
Abstract: Contributors Foreword 1. The Concept of Conservatism 2. Conservatism, Authoritarianism and Related Variables a Review and Empirical Study 3. The Need for a New Approach to Attitude Measurement 4. Development and Evaluation of the C-Scale 5. The Factor Structure of the C-Scale 6. Measurement and Structure of Children's Attitudes 7. Religion, Racialism and Conservatism 8. Theological Conservatism 9. Conservatism and Superstitious Behaviour 10. Conservatism and Aesthetic Judgements 11. Conservatism and Response to Humour 12. The Temperamental Basis of Attitudes 13. Stimulus-Seeking and Conservatism 14. Conservatism Within Families: A Study of the Generation Gap 15. Conservatism, Psychiatry and Mental Distress 16. Attitudes to the Common Market: A Case Study in Conservatism 17. A Dynamic Theory of Conservatism
472 citations
404 citations
TL;DR: Reactivity to pleasant stimuli is diminished in patients suffering from low levels of depression and/or anhedonia, but reactivity even to unpleasant stimuli seems compromised at high levels of depressed and/ or anhedonic patients.
172 citations
TL;DR: The Eysenck Personality Profiler and a stress symptom checklist were given to 162 performing artists (33 actors, 26 dancers, 65 musicians and 38 singers) and scores were compared against test norms and a control group as discussed by the authors.
167 citations
Cited by
More filters
TL;DR: In this paper, self-report scales to assess dispositional BIS and behavioral activation system (BAS) sensitivities were created, and a situation in which Ss anticipated a punishment was created.
Abstract: J. A. Gray (1981, 1982) holds that 2 general motivational systems underlie behavior and affect: a behavioral inhibition system (BIS) and a behavioral activation system (BAS). Self-report scales to assess dispositional BIS and BAS sensitivities were created. Scale development (Study 1) and convergent and discriminant validity in the form of correlations with alternative measures are reported (Study 2). In Study 3, a situation in which Ss anticipated a punishment was created. Controlling for initial nervousness, Ss high in BIS sensitivity (assessed earlier) were more nervous than those low in BIS sensitivity. In Study 4, a situation in which Ss anticipated a reward was created. Controlling for initial happiness, Ss high in BAS sensitivity (Reward Responsiveness and Drive scales) were happier than those low in BAS sensitivity. In each case the new scales predicted better than an alternative measure. Discussion is focused on conceptual implications.
6,345 citations
Book•
01 Jan 1999TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a theory of intergroup relations from visiousness to viciousness, and the psychology of group dominance, as well as the dynamics of the criminal justice system.
Abstract: Part I. From There to Here - Theoretical Background: 1. From visiousness to viciousness: theories of intergroup relations 2. Social dominance theory as a new synthesis Part II. Oppression and its Psycho-Ideological Elements: 3. The psychology of group dominance: social dominance orientation 4. Let's both agree that you're really stupid: the power of consensual ideology Part III. The Circle of Oppression - The Myriad Expressions of Institutional Discrimination: 5. You stay in your part of town and I'll stay in mine: discrimination in the housing and retail markets 6. They're just too lazy to work: discrimination in the labor market 7. They're just mentally and physically unfit: discrimination in education and health care 8. The more of 'them' in prison, the better: institutional terror, social control and the dynamics of the criminal justice system Part IV. Oppression as a Cooperative Game: 9. Social hierarchy and asymmetrical group behavior: social hierarchy and group difference in behavior 10. Sex and power: the intersecting political psychologies of patriarchy and empty-set hierarchy 11. Epilogue.
3,970 citations
TL;DR: Social dominance orientation (SDO), one's degree of preference for inequality among social groups, is introduced in this article, which is related to beliefs in a lag number of social and political ideologies that support group-based hierarchy and to support for policies that have implications for intergroup relations (e.g., war, civil rights, and social programs).
Abstract: Social dominance orientation (SDO), one's degree of preference for inequality among social groups, is introduced. On the basis of social dominance theory, it is shown that (a) men are more social dominance-oriented than women, (b) high-SDO people seek hierarchy-enhancing professional roles and low-SDO people seek hierarchy-attenuating roles, (c) SDO was related to beliefs in a lag number of social and political ideologies that support group-based hierarchy (e.g., meritocracy and racism) and to support for policies that have implications for intergroup relations (e.g., war, civil rights, and social programs), including new policies. SDO was distinguished from interpersonal dominance, conservatism, and authoritarianism
3,967 citations
TL;DR: The core ideology of conservatism stresses resistance to change and justification of inequality and is motivated by needs that vary situationally and dispositionally to manage uncertainty and threat.
Abstract: Analyzing political conservatism as motivated social cognition integrates theories of personality (authoritarianism, dogmatism-intolerance of ambiguity), epistemic and existential needs (for closure, regulatory focus, terror management), and ideological rationalization (social dominance, system justification). A meta-analysis (88 samples, 12 countries, 22,818 cases) confirms that several psychological variables predict political conservatism: death anxiety (weighted mean r = .50); system instability (.47); dogmatism-intolerance of ambiguity (.34); openness to experience (-.32); uncertainty tolerance (-.27); needs for order, structure, and closure (.26); integrative complexity (-.20); fear of threat and loss (.18); and self-esteem (-.09). The core ideology of conservatism stresses resistance to change and justification of inequality and is motivated by needs that vary situationally and dispositionally to manage uncertainty and threat.
3,745 citations
TL;DR: In this article, it is proposed that members of stigmatized groups may attribute negative feedback to prejudice against their group, compare their outcomes with those of the ingroup, rather than with the relatively advantaged outgroup, and selectively devalue those dimensions on which their group fares poorly and value those dimensions that their group excels.
Abstract: Although several psychological theories predict that members of stigmatized groups should have low global self-esteem, empirical research typically does not support this prediction. It is proposed here that this discrepancy may be explained by considering the ways in which membership in a stigmatized group may protect the self-concept It is proposed that members of stigmatized groups may (a) attribute negative feedback to prejudice against their group, (b) compare their outcomes with those of the ingroup, rather than with the relatively advantaged outgroup, and (c) selectively devalue those dimensions on which their group fares poorly and value those dimensions on which their group excels. Evidence for each of these processes and their consequences for self-esteem and motivation is reviewed. Factors that moderate the use of these strategies and implications of this analysis for treatment of stigmas are also discussed. For more than three decades, social psychological research on prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination has examined both the content of stereotypes about a variety of social groups
3,298 citations