scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Book

Social Dominance: An Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression

01 Jan 1999-
TL;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.
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
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


Cites background or result from "Social Dominance: An Intergroup The..."

  • ...According to social dominance theory, human societies strive to minimize group conflict by developing ideological belief systems that justify the hegemony of some groups over others (Pratto, 1999; Pratto et al., 1994; Sidanius, 1993; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999; Sidanius et al., 1996)....

    [...]

  • ...…regulatory focus (Higgins, 1997; Liberman et al., 1999), anxiety arising from mortality salience (Greenberg et al., 1990, 1992), group-based dominance (Pratto et al., 1994; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999), and system justification tendencies (Jost & Banaji, 1994; Jost, Burgess, & Mosso, 2001)....

    [...]

  • ...…dissonance, uncertainty, or instability (e.g., Jost, Pelham, Sheldon, & Sullivan, 2003; Lane, 1962; Nias, 1973), whereas the advantaged might gravitate toward conservatism for reasons of self-interest or social dominance (e.g., Centers, 1949; Sidanius & Ekehammar, 1979; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999)....

    [...]

  • ...Ideological devices such as these are inherently conservative in content because they seek to preserve existing hierarchies of status, power, and wealth and to prevent qualitative social change (e.g., Sidanius & Pratto, 1999)....

    [...]

  • ...First, they may lead to an actively hostile or dominant approach to dealing with socially sanctioned scapegoats and devalued out-groups, which is also the primary focus of social dominance theory (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999; Whitley, 1999)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This chapter addresses the psychological effects of social stigma by reviewing and organizing recent theory and empirical research within an identity threat model of stigma, which posits that situational cues, collective representations of one's stigma status, and personal beliefs and motives shape appraisals of the significance of stigma-relevant situations for well-being.
Abstract: This chapter addresses the psychological effects of social stigma. Stigma directly affects the stigmatized via mechanisms of discrimination, expectancy confirmation, and automatic stereotype activation, and indirectly via threats to personal and social identity. We review and organize recent theory and empirical research within an identity threat model of stigma. This model posits that situational cues, collective representations of one's stigma status, and personal beliefs and motives shape appraisals of the significance of stigma-relevant situations for well-being. Identity threat results when stigma-relevant stressors are appraised as potentially harmful to one's social identity and as exceeding one's coping resources. Identity threat creates involuntary stress responses and motivates attempts at threat reduction through coping strategies. Stress responses and coping efforts affect important outcomes such as self-esteem, academic achievement, and health. Identity threat perspectives help to explain the...

2,680 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper reviewed and integrated 10 years of research on 20 hypotheses derived from a system justification perspective, focusing on the phenomenon of implicit outgroup favoritism among members of disadvantaged groups (including African Americans, the elderly, and gays/lesbians) and its relation to political ideology.
Abstract: Most theories in social and political psychology stress self-interest, intergroup conflict, ethnocentrism, homophily, ingroup bias, outgroup antipathy, dominance, and resistance. System justification theory is influenced by these perspectives—including social identity and social dominance theories—but it departs from them in several respects. Advocates of system justification theory argue that (a) there is a general ideological motive to justify the existing social order, (b) this motive is at least partially responsible for the internalization of inferiority among members of disadvantaged groups, (c) it is observed most readily at an implicit, nonconscious level of awareness and (d) paradoxically, it is sometimes strongest among those who are most harmed by the status quo. This article reviews and integrates 10 years of research on 20 hypotheses derived from a system justification perspective, focusing on the phenomenon of implicit outgroup favoritism among members of disadvantaged groups (including African Americans, the elderly, and gays/lesbians) and its relation to political ideology (especially liberalism-conservatism).

2,236 citations


Cites background or methods from "Social Dominance: An Intergroup The..."

  • ...…showed that reminders of benevolent and complementary gender stereotypes increase both gender-specific and diffuse support for the system among women respondents, who might otherwise be less likely than men to view the status quo as fair, legitimate, and justified (e.g., Sidanius & Pratto, 1999)....

    [...]

  • ...Like all contemporary researchers of intergroup relations, we have been influenced immensely by theories of social identification (Tajfel & Turner, 1986) and social dominance (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999)....

    [...]

  • ...We do not believe, however, that the existing evidence is sufficient to warrant accepting the notion that hierarchy and inequality are genetically mandated at either the individual or species level, as argued by Sidanius and Pratto (1993, 1999) ....

    [...]

  • ...(Bobo, 1988; Sherif, 1967; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999) Intergroup behavior is driven primarily by ethnocentrism and ingroup favoritism....

    [...]

  • ...Like all contemporary researchers of intergroup relations, we have been influenced immensely by theories of social identification (Tajfel & Turner, 1986) and social dominance ( Sidanius & Pratto, 1999 )....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Results showed the importance of social identity in predicting collective action by supporting SIMCA's key predictions that affective injustice and politicized identity produced stronger effects than those of non-affective injustice and non-politicized identity.
Abstract: An integrative social identity model of collective action (SIMCA) is developed that incorporates 3 socio-psychological perspectives on collective action. Three meta-analyses synthesized a total of 182 effects of perceived injustice, efficacy, and identity on collective action (corresponding to these socio-psychological perspectives). Results showed that, in isolation, all 3 predictors had medium-sized (and causal) effects. Moreover, results showed the importance of social identity in predicting collective action by supporting SIMCA's key predictions that (a) affective injustice and politicized identity produced stronger effects than those of non-affective injustice and non-politicized identity; (b) identity predicted collective action against both incidental and structural disadvantages, whereas injustice and efficacy predicted collective action against incidental disadvantages better than against structural disadvantages; (c) all 3 predictors had unique medium-sized effects on collective action when controlling for between-predictor covariance; and (d) identity bridged the injustice and efficacy explanations of collective action. Results also showed more support for SIMCA than for alternative models reflecting previous attempts at theoretical integration. The authors discuss key implications for theory, practice, future research, and further integration of social and psychological perspectives on collective action.

1,744 citations


Cites background from "Social Dominance: An Intergroup The..."

  • ...For example, people may accept or even internalize their disadvantage, or use social creativity strategies (e.g., Derks, Van Laar, & Ellemers, 2006; Jost & Hunyady, 2002; Major, 1994; Schmitt, Branscombe, & Postmes, 2003; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999)....

    [...]

  • ...Structural disadvantage includes structural low group status or discrimination based on membership of a social group or category (e.g., Jost & Hunyady, 2002; Major, 1994; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999; Sidanius, Pratto, Van Laar, & Levin, 2004; Tajfel, 1978)....

    [...]

  • ...Indeed, high status groups are often motivated to maintain and enhance group-based hierarchies (e.g., Jost & Major, 2001; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999; Sidanius et al., 2004)....

    [...]

01 Jan 2003
TL;DR: These “Guidelines on Multicultural Education, Training, Research, Practice, and Organizational Change for Psychologists” reflect knowledge and skills needed for the profession in the midst of dramatic historic sociopolitical changes in U.S. society, as well as needs of new constituencies, markets, and clients.
Abstract: Preface All individuals exist in social, political, historical, and economic contexts, and psychologists are increasingly called upon to understand the influence of these contexts on individuals’ behavior. The “Guidelines on Multicultural Education, Training, Research, Practice, and Organizational Change for Psychologists” reflect the continuing evolution of the study of psychology, changes in society at large, and emerging data about the different needs of particular individuals and groups historically marginalized or disenfranchised within and by psychology based on their ethnic/racial heritage and social group identity or membership. These “Guidelines on Multicultural Education, Training, Research, Practice, and Organizational Change for Psychologists” reflect knowledge and skills needed for the profession in the midst of dramatic historic sociopolitical changes in U.S. society, as well as needs of new constituencies, markets, and clients. The specific goals of these guidelines are to provide psychologists with (a) the rationale and needs for addressing multiculturalism and diversity in education, training, research, practice, and organizational change; (b) basic information, relevant terminology, current empirical research from psychology and related disciplines, and other data that support the proposed guidelines and underscore their importance; (c) references to enhance ongoing education, training, research, practice, and organizational change methodologies; and (d) paradigms that broaden the purview of psychology as a profession.

1,711 citations


Cites background from "Social Dominance: An Intergroup The..."

  • ...Supporting this guideline are contextual data that provide a rationale for positioning multiculturalism as thematic to structures, functions, and strategic planning within an organization, as well as examples of changes in psychology policies and practices....

    [...]

  • ...…the United States and have noted that ignoring group differences can lead to the maintenance of the status quo and assumptions that racial/ethnic minority groups share the same perspective as dominant group members (Schofield, 1986; Sidanius & Pratto, 1999; Wolsko, Park, Judd, & Wittenbrink, 2000)....

    [...]

References
More filters
Book
01 Jan 1959
TL;DR: For instance, in the case of an individual in the presence of others, it can be seen as a form of involuntary expressive behavior as discussed by the authors, where the individual will have to act so that he intentionally or unintentionally expresses himself, and the others will in turn have to be impressed in some way by him.
Abstract: hen an individual enters the presence of oth ers, they commonly seek to acquire information about him or to bring into play information about him already possessed. They will be interested in his general socio-economic status, his concep tion of self, his attitude toward them, his compe tence, his trustworthiness, etc. Although some of this information seems to be sought almost as an end in itself, there are usually quite practical reasons for acquiring it. Information about the individual helps to define the situation, enabling others to know in advance what he will expect of them and what they may expect of him. Informed in these ways, the others will know how best to act in order to call forth a desired response from him. For those present, many sources of information become accessible and many carriers (or “signvehicles”) become available for conveying this information. If unacquainted with the individual, observers can glean clues from his conduct and appearance which allow them to apply their previ ous experience with individuals roughly similar to the one before them or, more important, to apply untested stereotypes to him. They can also assume from past experience that only individuals of a par ticular kind are likely to be found in a given social setting. They can rely on what the individual says about himself or on documentary evidence he provides as to who and what he is. If they know, or know of, the individual by virtue of experience prior to the interaction, they can rely on assumptions as to the persistence and generality of psychological traits as a means of predicting his present and future behavior. However, during the period in which the indi vidual is in the immediate presence of the others, few events may occur which directly provide the others with the conclusive information they will need if they are to direct wisely their own activity . Many crucial facts lie beyond the time and place of interaction or lie concealed within it. For example, the “true” or “real” attitudes, beliefs, and emotions of the individual can be ascertained only indirectly , through his avowals or through what appears to be involuntary expressive behavior. Similarly , if the individual offers the others a product or service, they will often find that during the interaction there will be no time and place immediately available for eating the pudding that the proof can be found in. They will be forced to accept some events as con ventional or natural signs of something not directly available to the senses. In Ichheiser ’s terms, 1 the individual will have to act so that he intentionally or unintentionally expresses himself, and the others will in turn have to be impressed in some way by him.…

33,615 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A genetical mathematical model is described which allows for interactions between relatives on one another's fitness and a quantity is found which incorporates the maximizing property of Darwinian fitness, named “inclusive fitness”.

14,730 citations

Book ChapterDOI
12 Jul 2017
TL;DR: The p,cnetics of sex nas now becn clarif ied, and Fishcr ( 1958 ) hrs produccd , n,od"l to cxplarn sex ratios at coDception, a nrodel recently extendcd to include special mccha_ nisms that operate under inbreeding (Hunrilron I96?).
Abstract: There is a tendency among biologists studying social behavior to regard the adult sex ratio as an independent variable to which the species reacts with appropriate adaptations D Lack often interprets social behavior as an adaptation in part to an unbalanced (or balanced) sex ratio, and J Verner has summarized other instances of this tendency The only mechanism that will generate differential mortality independent of sexual differences clearly related to parental investment and sexual selection is the chromosomal mechanism, applied especially to humans and other mammals: the unguarded X chromosome of the male is presumed to predispose him to higher mortality Each offspring can be viewed as an investment independent of other offspring, increasing investment in one offspring tending to decrease investment in others Species can be classified according to the relative parental investment of the sexes in their young In the vast majority of species, the male's only contribution to the survival of his offspring is his sex cells

10,571 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This letter is in response to your two Citizen Petitions, requesting that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) require a cancer warning on cosmetic talc products.
Abstract: This letter is in response to your two Citizen Petitions dated November 17, 1994 and May 13, 2008, requesting that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) require a cancer warning on cosmetic talc products. Your 1994 Petition requests that all cosmetic talc bear labels with a warning such as \"Talcum powder causes cancer in laboratory animals. Frequent talc application in the female genital area increases the risk of ovarian cancer.\" Additionally, your 2008 Petition requests that cosmetic talcum powder products bear labels with a prominent warning such as: \"Frequent talc application in the female genital area is responsible for major risks of ovarian cancer.\" Further, both of your Petitions specifically request, pursuant to 21 CFR 1 0.30(h)(2), a hearing for you to present scientific evidence in support of this petition.

9,350 citations